Present:

• Chair: Martin MacLeod, Engineering Computing
• Erick Engelke, Engineering Computing
• Dave Walsh, Engineering Computing
• Mahindra Sangara, Systems Design
• Richard Scott, Civil Engineering
• Dennis Herman, Chemical Engineering
• Mike Herz, Civil Engineering
• Paul Martin

Regrets

• not a real ESAG meeting, attendance optional

Discussion

• changes are expected to be made this month to reflect CCIC changes discussed up to this point
• primarily related to using Cat5e rather than older Cat5 stuff, and changes for testing to reflect Cat5e differences
• Martin: Cat5e is precursor to Cat6
• Dennis: we have lots of Cat5
• Martin: Cat5e is just for new installations
• Dave: we have lots of Cat5 too
• Erick: any cable you've bought from IST recently is automatically Cat5e
• Mike: has anyone decided on Cat5e is a standard
• Martin: yes, CCIC decided
• Dennis: and they have authorization
• Dave: yes
• Martin gave the history
• Mike: you can't buy Cat5 anymore anyway
• Dave: we don't have to replace old Cat5, it's grandfatherred
• blue cabling is Cat5
• purple is Cat5e
• some telephone is blue, but most is white
• Mike: this is ridiculous if documents are out of date, people need to know changes
• Martin was certain he had brought these changes to ESAG when it happened but minutes then were not as extensive as these (editorial embellishment)
• Mike: Cat5e will likely be never used to the desktop, it's a waste of time specifying Cat5, but it's a mute point since it's all you can buy
• Dennis: we've used all sorts of colours.  Pursue replacing Cat5 with Cat5e
• Martin: expect gigabit to closet, 100 Mbps to desktop
• Dave: ip phones, video phones will use the extra cables we are laying to offices
• Erick: but both those examples are 10 or 100 Mbps.  However, clustered computers (e.g.. Beowolf) can use gigabit
• Martin: we have the money to lay Cat5e for new installs now thanks to CFI

• Martin gave overview of installation concerns.  e.g..
• conduits rather than holes in walls
• using fire stops
• no drilling new holes - get Plant Ops to do it
• no dangling cable
• etc.
• Mike: need list of acceptable parts, should not be locked in
• Martin didn't care to save a few pennies, EC buys from IST
• Mike: want option on parts and manufacturer
• Martin: you're not alone, Vic Neglia asked for the same option too
• Dave: we get excellent rates because IST buys 1000 parts bulk
• Martin: we have the option of another Panduit course if there is interest

• Martin: Testing takes two people.  Dave and a departmental guy doing the testing makes most sense.  We do a link test and a channel test.
• Dave: test to wall outlet
• Mike: got to define what is required
• Dave: yes it's coming
• Martin: EIA and TIA standards
• Mike: should be condensed
• Martin: Dave is working on it.  There are lots of considerations, e.g.. going above or below heating ducts.
• Mike: these guidelines need to be spread around

• Dave: the drawings are not yet available on the SMB share, soon
• Martin: we have Excel maps for switch closets
• Dave shared various documents showing room layouts, wiring, jack placement, etc.  Any drawing package will do.  Dave uses SmartDraw.
• Dennis: Visio drawing package lets you connect to a database
• Martin: maps for offices don't need the level of detail Dave did

• Dave: leave the thicknet
• Martin: basically just the Institute for Risk Research
• Mike: there is one in use in Civil too, and we are leaving it

• Martin gave his personal list of reasons why predoc is a good idea
• preplanning, and you have to do it for postdoc anyway, usually can use the same drawing for both
• Martin is CCIC rep, Plant Ops expects they can ask him at anytime about any work in ceilings/walls
• reduce likelihood of having to rip out and redo.  Can point to concerns, e.g.. asbestos
• Martin: biggest reason (his opinion) is that Plant Ops insists, they demand it of all electrical, HVAC and water changes too.
• Dennis: the standard is prior to June 99 and we (depts.) felt it was sufficient just to tell Martin, why should we change now?  Also, Dennis has another 200 cables to lay, this would be a lot of work.
• Martin: I would do it in about 9 sections of about 20 wires
• Mike: what is difference between text and drawings, how will a drawing enhance the information?
• Martin: we all agree there should be some predoc
• All agree
• Mike cites extensive construction experience, but no low voltage drawings.  Shouldn't do it, it's impossible to know in advance
• Martin: times are changing, cites examples of two new buildings on campus and how all low voltage must be documented, this is enforced on contractors today.
• Mike: I'm sure you can find a few examples.  It's not done for a reason, it's a big waste of time.
• Martin: we should decide what information we think we should provide
• Mike: Civil uses an enhanced wire ID compared to campus standard
• Martin: we do too, everyone does it, we talked about it at ESAG
• Mike: propose wire ID is sufficient as predoc
• Martin: what if we go with just text... let's decide what we need
• Mike: gave example of a difficult run whose route not be anticipated
• Dave: just give the proposed route
• Martin proposed:
• for office runs, just give text of source, destination and number of wires
• cables between switches/buildings/two closets we should predocument with a drawing
• Mike: I endorse this
• All agreed
• Martin: there will have to be an understanding that the cable layer takes responsibility for if they don't meet the specs.  Unsatisfactory runs will have to be removed and redone.
• All agreed
• Martin: we expect new documentation (mostly about Cat5e) before next ESAG meeting
• Martin: you can borrow the cable tester, but Dave comes with it