Talk:Registered jack

Try http://www.bnoack.com/data/cables/RJ_types.html for a table that shows the difference between RJs 10, 11, 12, 14, 45, 48.

wgustafson@leviton.com

Wall Plates and Surface Mount Boxes

I think there should be a section explaining how jacks are inserting into various types of telecommunication equipment like Keystone wall plates and surface mount boxes. In a professional job, you would not terminate a cable to a jack without securing it to something. Chewbaggins (talk) 26 May 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 21:16, 26 May 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Naming Confusion

The naming confusion section refers to RJ11 as "six-position" and then in the next sentence "The four-position RJ-11". The picture labels the four pin plug as "RJ11".

What the picture labels "RJ11" is in fact a six position plug. And it has 4 pins. The two outermost slots in the plug don't have pins in them. Hence, this is a "6P4C modular plug." -- Bryan Henderson 23:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It also suggests that RJ11 is a two wire standard. The source above disagrees with this. I don't like to do it, because I don't know enough about the subject - but I'd suggest removing this "naming confusion" section until it actually addresses the naming confusion clearly.

RJ11 is definitely two wires. I don't know what source above disagrees, but that needs to be fixed. -- Bryan Henderson 23:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.sundance-communications.com/forum/Forum24/HTML/000065.html has discussion on this subject by some people who are keen on getting it right. The feeling I get is that RJ-xx is not the correct name for the plug or socket, but is in fact the wiring standard. From that discussion:

Just for the record, there are generally only two types of modular plugs and jacks. The six position, commonly referred to as RJ11, and the eight position, commonly referred to as RJ45.

The six position can be wired with two wires on pins 3/4, therefore an RJ11. This same plug can be wired with four wires on pins 3/4 and 2/5, thus becoming an RJ12, 13 or 14. Finally, this same plug can be wired with three pairs on pins 3/4, 2/5 and 1/6 to become an RJ25 wiring configruation. So, as you can see, it's not the actual plug that determines the "RJ" number, it's how that same plug is wired for the different configurations.

--AndyP 17:03, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it's a confused mess, For example RJ12 here says it refers to a 6 with 4 connections used but the article i get to when i click on RJ12 Says otherwise. Also while you could use a 6/6 connector and only use 2 or 4 pins the vast majority of cables i've seen don't and it would be more of a pain to wire only two wires to a 6P6C than to a properly designed 6P4C. -- Plugwash

Yeah, I think the only way to save this article is to start over. I'll see if I can do that, but it will be hard since I don't have the 1970s documents that would have the final word on what these terms mean. I think we need to split this into two articles: registered jack, and modular connector. And the corruption in the RJ45 name is so severe, that I think we have to treat it as the legitimate name of two independent things and let the RJ45 article cover the common, technically incorrect, usage (i.e. RJ45 = 8P8C modular). We also need to remove the TIA-568 standard from the RJ45 article. -- Bryan Henderson 23:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I did it. New modular connector article describes physical connectors and registered jack describes registered jacks and refers to modular connector article. RJ45 article describes the other "RJ45".

But now I see various other articles on specific registered jack types with the same redundant and incorrect information. I will now try to make those consistent. I suspect some of them would work better as a few extra words in registered jack instead of a separate article.

(Unfortunately, I forgot to log in; the anonymous updates today are mine).

Bryan Henderson 21:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Am I the only one who is thoroughly confused by the whole "USOC" section ? It seems to contradict itself every other sentence.

--adaptr (talk) 12:46, 19 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where is 47CFR68.502?

I checked the GPO Access site, and there is no 47CFR68.502; at least, not in the latest revisions. Why is this citation still here? Nulbyte 01:55, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The authority was transferred to a private organization in 2001 and section 502 repealed.. I added that information in June, but forgot to remove the reference to 47CFG68.502. I've done that now. -- Bryan Henderson 21:34, 30 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the current private standards seem to have nasty redistribution conditions attatched we imo should if possible link to the original pre-delegation standards as well (US fedral standards are PD aren't they?) Plugwash 17:28, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RJ12 often used for 6P6C

Is this another example of the kind of misuse we have seen with RJ45? Lego (with reference to the mindstorms nxt) and microchip (with reference to the icd2) both seem to use it. What other uses does a 6P6C connector have and do its users also reffer to it as a RJ12? (i'm not discussing right or wrong here, just actual use) Plugwash 00:25, 11 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Simplify! Just use RJ45 jacks wired T568A and you can use it for phone - 1,2, 3 and 4 lines; the majority of phone systems; LAN; various media distribution (HDTV) systems; and more - that's basically become the d-facto standard (kinda). For example, just plug an RJ11,12, etc into a RJ45 jack, plug the other end of the wire into a phone distribution module in the distributed wiring enclosure and BAM it's a phone jack. Or plug your RJ45 from your computer into the jack with the other end of the wire into a network router in the distributed wiring enclosure and BAM it's a network port. - So again, just use RJ45 jacks wired T568A. (in MOST situations-there are always exceptions to everything...) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbg1959 (talk • contribs) 13:37, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grounding

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twisted_pair discusses shielding and screening in a cable and mentions that it is ineffective unless a shield or screen is grounded. This is probably achieved through the jack, but how? All the jacks in this article are plastic with no mention of a ground.
Regards, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 05:04, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There is a variant of the 8P8C "RJ45" connector with contacts on the sides for the screen used for shielded twisted pair ethernet wiring (most cards/hubs/switches have the contacts for a shield but shielded wiring is rarely used in practice). I don't know if and where this is standardised and whether similar things exist for other sizes. Plugwash (talk) 15:21, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Plugwash. Does anyone have a picture of one of these? Anyone care to mention under "Uncommon types"? Perhaps grounding warrants a new heading.
Regards, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 15:36, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"The middle two can be plugged into the same standard six-pin jack, pictured"

There is no "Middle two", methinks. What's a better way to say this?

216.79.193.84 (talk) 15:35, 13 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Registered or Registration

The article is headed "Registered jack" (which makes sense according to it's definition) but contains frequent references to "Registration jack", which makes no sense to me. Is this just sloppiness/typos or is there some rationale to it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.49.27.35 (talk) 13:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be bad editing. It first appeared in revision 245804589 I've corrected these. Tothwolf (talk) 01:21, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What about 6p8c jacks?

Our university dorms used 6p8c jack and plugs to deliver networking in each customers room until very recently. I didn't see any mention of jacks that have a higher 'c' than 'p' numbers. Should they be in the uncommon section? Larek (talk) 13:01, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where's the actual info?

"True RJ45" redirects to this article, but this article does nothing to define "true RJ45". Much of this article is a listing of what registered jacks are not. "True RJ45" is mentioned but never defined and all RJ45 links in this article point back to the 8P8C page which says "the true RJ45 uses a different 8P modular connector type". If RJ45 doesn't use 8P8C, then RJ45 shouldn't be used to link to the 8P8C page. Can anyone provide any information regarding the actual RJ45 specs? What's the physical jack type? What's the wiring pattern?