Released: March 2009
As we approach another significant industry milestone in the ratification of the ISO/IEC category 6A ‘component’ standard Graeme Stoker of Siemon considers the cabling market from the customer’s perspective. It’s likely that some products on the market will comply whilst others will lag behind. So how do systems get chosen and bought now to comply later?
Standards; a milestone?
It has become a feature of network infrastructure, that while the standards bodies painstakingly draft, edit, critique and ultimately publish performance standards, networks have to be built and operated today. Structured cabling manufacturers play a big part in this process as they are frequently represented on the committees that meticulously create the standards to which they must ultimately comply. Yet, they will be supplying product in advance of standards ratification.
Eventually, the standard becomes ratified, but what happens next? Well clearly all new installations should comply – what business would settle for less – and it is hoped, that all those already installed with the intention of meeting the new standard will also comply. But inevitably, some won’t. For those digging deeper, the critical question should be is mere standards compliance enough?
We are frequently told that a new network infrastructure should last at least 10 years, but the reality may be different. We know that bad decisions concerning the physical layer can quite literally lay shaky foundations for the future of a business. Can it make sense to buy now and hope that a cabling system will comply later? Is there a choice? Unfortunately hope just won’t do; businesses need certainty about their investments, especially in uncertain times, and often look to their installer to provide this.
International standards
The category 6 twisted pair cabling standard (whose main use is for Ethernet transmission) was updated early in 2008, creating a new standard referred to as category 6A. Category 6A operates at frequencies up to 500 MHz, twice that of its predecessor, and it can support applications up to 10 Gbit/s over the traditional 100m channel. The standard defined by the US TIA/EIA body (Electronic Industries Association and Telecommunications Industry Association), was ratified in 2008. Its more stringent international counterpart ISO/IEC 11801 is set to be updated internationally during 2009. Category 6A has been a popular choice in the market and this ISO/IEC ratification can only reinforce that sentiment.
Everyone, and especially the installer, can take an uncertain gamble when they select one structured cabling system over another, especially when the standards are still being discussed. And all too often it will be the installer who is called to deal with the dispute, at their expense and possibly loss of reputation.
Users and installers alike would be well advised to watch the press for the next unfolding round of pre-standards cabling as, before the ink is dry on the 10Gbit/s category 6A and the new category 7A standards, the IEEE (guardian of the Ethernet standards) is hard at work on new Ethernet standards for 40Gbit/s and 100Gbit/s for both fibre and possibly copper.
Standards and beyond
But it’s not all about standards, though this is a most important variable.
Users expect their infrastructure to run everything that they can ever think of, including applications which they currently do not know about, over the life of their chosen network design. More pressure on the installer.
Can the uncertainty about un-ratified standards be squared with the reasonable business demands of the user organisation? We certainly think so. Our approach is to see codified standards as a minimum level of performance, believing that there are no standards written where exceeding those standards would be considered undesirable. This, in turn, yields a culture in my own company of design-to-exceed (as opposed to over-engineering, which typically carries a manufacturing cost premium).
A question of headroom
Is compliance enough or should installers be looking for some headroom above the minimum standard? But which standard should we choose to follow? The US TIA/EIA standards are less stringent than ISO/IEC in setting performance margins and this has created a real issue for manufacturers who are unable to confirm category 6A performance margins to the TIA requirements, let alone the more important international standards (for the UK) such as ISO/IEC 11801. Some inevitably will fall sort.
Creating a performance buffer, that is big enough to smooth the variances caused by the reality of buildings of all ages and types, and the inevitable environmental conditions that can’t easily be changed or mitigated, is what is needed.
Headroom is especially beneficial when the cabling plant is subjected to frequent changes and allows the cabling to be more tolerant of variables associated with real-life cabling installations. In networks having hundreds or thousands of installed drops, even a low percentage of links having marginal test results, can consume hundreds of hours and take thousands of pounds to resolve.
But this headroom or performance contingency is not the only thing an installer needs to ensure customer satisfaction. Consistency and ease of installation, has always been a critical factor for installers and over the history of structured cabling, it has been hard to achieve.
It is entirely understandable that an installation technician with 10 years experience will be quicker and more accurate in for example, termination. But doesn’t this underline an unacceptable variable – delivered by the manufacturer – which is ultimately a risk to the installer?
For the structured cabling customer, the cost of installation represents a significant proportion of the initial cost. Marginal or so called, star-passes, encountered when testing and commissioning a new network, can be costly; mostly to the installer as they are involved in re-work, consuming both time and extra materials, all at the installer’s expense. The customer suffers some extra cost as well, as it inevitably has to cope with project delay, business disruption and duplicated cost (waste); installers also need to be aware of the contract penalties that this may incur.
Anecdotal evidence shows that a rapidly increasing number of tender documents are demanding that the new network has no marginal star-passes and adding cost contingency into a competitive, price aware market just won’t work; this risk component needs to be eradicated.
What if installers could terminate in substantially less time than the current average? What if less experienced installers could consistently terminate cable to the same standard as their experienced colleagues, in less than 60 seconds?
It is thought that for many structured cabling systems in the market currently, that cable termination times range from just over two minutes to a massive eight minutes. Extrapolate the ability to terminate faultlessly in 60 seconds throughout a typical network installation’s job costing and you can soon add up the savings.
To have this simplicity of termination would make a larger pool of capable installers an instant reality. And the certainty of absolutely no marginal passes or rework, would make the project much more predictable and significantly more cost-effective.
In fact, why not take just these two points and factor them into your last proposal – you will see how you can increase margin, reduce cost and, win more bids.
Many installers often offer both premium priced and a lower cost solution from different suppliers. This means that installers need to be trained more, sales need to know which system will win the business on offer, and the business has to double the lines of stock it holds and administers. If the performance of the cabling can increase, installation costs fall and the quality can rise, you might even consider whether there is any requirement to carry more than one system as a supplier?
Searching for the next generation
Different structured cabling suppliers have different polices on standards compliance and this will be reflected in their research and development programs. It is an entirely valid decision to develop a system that meets a particular, well defined need at very attractive prices, even if it means that as a category 6a system it cannot be considered for all applications.
Suppliers like ourselves addressing themselves to an international market however, need to build in more capability into their product design, to deal with the unexpected and the unknown. They must design in the means by which customers can protect their investment.
All too often price can be a misleading factor especially when it is merely the cost for the supply and installation of a system that is considered. While not making a case for a substantial cost premium, it is the understanding of the true cost of a structured cabling system, over its useful life, which needs to be measured and realistically understood. Pay now, repent later is simply not an option; bad decisions can be highly expensive and disruptive to resolve.
Taking a fuller, more informed view of all the costs associated with an infrastructure through its life cycle will be revealing and insightful. As already mentioned, installation costs can be reduced through time reductions for key operations and offer improved more consistent (predictable) results.
A substantial level of margin against ratified standards can additionally ensure that network critical, application restricting factors, such as latency and Near End Cross-Talk (NEXT) are minimised.
And then there is the small matter of connector density. Another common piece of received wisdom is that 24 connectors in a one U is getting close to the physical limit, especially for category 6A systems. If a cabling system could double this to 48 in the same height, imagine how this scales to further project savings for the installer and the end client, as the number of racks, data centre floor space and direct and indirect energy costs, are all reduced – a clear example of both reduced initial cost (CAPEX) and reduced recurring ownership costs (OPEX), all combined with a much improved, more capable solution.
Timely arrival
When an installer is selecting a structured cabling system to promote and install, and when it is early on in the committee stages of a new cabling standard, there is uncertainty. Manufacturers will take a view on the discussions and have a strong desire to get product to market to meet their anticipation of the emerging standard and capture early adopters.
Doing just enough may be a strategy, but the risk for everyone is that post ratification the performance of a new network is very far away from that which is required by the new, ratified standard. However if ample performance headroom was designed in from the outset, and installation methods were simplified to a level of consistent repetition, the network should meet requirements, with some ease.
How the manufacturer reacts during and after the process of standards ratification is a good indicator to installers and customers alike. From a strong market position, Siemon has been researching and developing the next generation of category 6A connectors, culminating in the arrival of Z-Max. This system, just launched, delivers on the promise of substantial headroom above the (expected) minimum performance standards, a significant step knowing that some solutions available today do not even claim margin to the lesser technical requirements of the TIA standards. It makes cable termination of 60 seconds or less a repeatable reality for even a novice; offers 48 port density in a 1U panel and, allows the installer to make every installation free of marginal passes, re-work and unexpected cost.
Warranty can be a deciding factor and 20 years for structured cabling is common place in the market. A guarantee of the cabling and connectors against manufacturing defects and installation quality problems is worth having, but it only goes so far. If your customer design calls for transport of services such as Voice over IP, Video over IP and Network Storage for example, a warranty that specifically warrants these services over the designed networks demonstrates real manufacturers’ confidence, and allows the installer to offer the warranty with confidence – this should make for a delighted customer.
So to the question; can it make sense to comply now and pay later? Only if your chosen structured cabling supplier is designing its components and cable to substantially exceed codified standards at a price that reduces cost of ownership and protects the life expectancy of the product.
About Siemon
Established in 1903, Siemon™ is an industry leader specialising in the manufacture and innovation of high quality, high-performance network cabling solutions. With global offices and partners throughout the world, Siemon offers the most comprehensive suite of copper (unshielded and shielded twisted-pair) and fibre cabling systems available and is one of only three network cabling infrastructure companies worldwide with true global partnership capabilities. With over 400 active patents specific to structured cabling, Siemon Labs invests heavily in R&D and development of industry standards, underlining the company’s long-term commitment to its customers and the industry.
www.siemon.co.uk
TSC0303
Copper Cabling, The Siemon Company | Debbie Ireland | 
September 6, 2010 10:09 pm | 
Comments (0) 
Subscribe
