crossover couplerr test

I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.

Big
Wed May 07 09:30:00 PDT 2008

Andre De Clercq wrote:
> I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
> doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
> chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>
>
Sounds valid to me. Double negative thing.

Big
Wed May 07 09:31:15 PDT 2008

Andre De Clercq wrote:
> I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
> doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
> chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>
>
You've tested the crossover cable in place of the crossover connector
right? Just to make sure the concept the the crossover is the right
connection?

Bob
Wed May 07 10:50:33 PDT 2008

Yes, or you can just check the leads for continuity.
http://www.homenethelp.com/web/explain/about-ethernet-crossover.asp

Andre De Clercq wrote:
> I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
> doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
> chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>
>

OldDuke
Wed May 07 16:37:37 PDT 2008

On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
<andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:

>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>
Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.

Ask elsewhere

M
Wed May 07 23:53:07 PDT 2008


"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
news:d9f424d20a0m0pp442lo0qrl5jkv9asa2u@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>
>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>>
> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>
> Ask elsewhere
>

OldDuke is our resident fuckwit.

Ignore him. He just cannot get his head around this strange concept that
hardware questions belong in this *hardware* newsgroup.

Bob
Thu May 08 03:12:55 PDT 2008

OldDuke wrote:

> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>
>
>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>>
>
> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>
> Ask elsewhere
>

Ignore OldDuke. Most of us think this is a proper NG for the question.
--
Cheers, Bob

Walter
Thu May 08 03:41:33 PDT 2008


"Bob Willard" <BobwBSGS@TrashThis.comcast.net> wrote in message
news:eeLTVQPsIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> OldDuke wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
>> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>>
>> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>>
>> Ask elsewhere
>>
>
> Ignore OldDuke. Most of us think this is a proper NG for the question.
>

You are nearly right.

If we ignore OldDuke (or whatever he is calling himself today), then *all*
of us think this is a proper NG for the question.

Andre
Thu May 08 06:41:54 PDT 2008


"Andre De Clercq" <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote in message
news:eS4z8oFsIHA.1952@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>Thank you all, and for gentlemen OldDuke I would appreciate if he could
>complete his remark by also telling where he likes me to put my question.
>To Bob I : the reason for my question is that I want to use my second
>wireless router as an access point in my network. To do this I need a
>crossed connection from one of my first router's output ports to one of the
>output ports of that second router. So I bought a crossover adapter which
>schould allow a crossed connection when conbined with a standard
>patchcable...didn't work.. I then got a crossover cable from a friend and
>this seems to work. So I doubt about the crossed adapter, and wanted to
>make shure that double crossing is a valuable test method.

OldDuke
Sat May 10 17:55:55 PDT 2008

On Thu, 8 May 2008 07:53:07 +0100, "M.I.5¾"
<no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote:

>
>"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
>news:d9f424d20a0m0pp442lo0qrl5jkv9asa2u@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
>> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>>
>>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>>>
>> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>>
>> Ask elsewhere
>>
>
>OldDuke is our resident fuckwit.
>
>Ignore him. He just cannot get his head around this strange concept that
>hardware questions belong in this *hardware* newsgroup.
>

Ignore MI5 as well. He is the resident Dip. He just cannot get his
hard around this strange concept that the hardware questions also need
to relate to XP, hence the WINDOWSXP name in the group title preceding
the word Hardware.

OldDuke
Sat May 10 17:56:12 PDT 2008

On Thu, 08 May 2008 06:12:55 -0400, Bob Willard
<BobwBSGS@TrashThis.comcast.net> wrote:

>OldDuke wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
>> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>>>
>>
>> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>>
>> Ask elsewhere
>>
>
>Ignore OldDuke. Most of us think this is a proper NG for the question.

Of course you are WRONG.

M
Mon May 12 00:12:22 PDT 2008


"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
news:0vgc24d4v19adeuempi4ui8r1mlvlf484a@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 8 May 2008 07:53:07 +0100, "M.I.5¾"
> <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>>"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
>>news:d9f424d20a0m0pp442lo0qrl5jkv9asa2u@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
>>> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>>>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>>>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>>>>
>>> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>>>
>>> Ask elsewhere
>>>
>>
>>OldDuke is our resident fuckwit.
>>
>>Ignore him. He just cannot get his head around this strange concept that
>>hardware questions belong in this *hardware* newsgroup.
>>
>
> Ignore MI5 as well. He is the resident Dip. He just cannot get his
> hard around this strange concept that the hardware questions also need
> to relate to XP, hence the WINDOWSXP name in the group title preceding
> the word Hardware.
>

As has been frequently pointed out, I don't care and neither does *anyone*
else. Which part of "No one cares" do you have problems with? That doesn't
make me a resident anything, but merely further underlines that you are a
fuck wit.

Walter
Mon May 12 00:15:58 PDT 2008


"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
news:61hc24ldfob3jp6i4asnpispp03gua1qk8@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 08 May 2008 06:12:55 -0400, Bob Willard
> <BobwBSGS@TrashThis.comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>OldDuke wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
>>> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>>>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>>>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>>>
>>> Ask elsewhere
>>>
>>
>>Ignore OldDuke. Most of us think this is a proper NG for the question.
>
> Of course you are WRONG.
>

Actually he is entirely correct. Everyone else, except you, thinks that
this *is* a proper newsgroup for this question and you don't count because
you obviously have mental problems.

OldDuke
Mon May 12 15:44:34 PDT 2008

On Mon, 12 May 2008 08:15:58 +0100, "Walter Wall" <me@privacy.net>
wrote:

>
>"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
>news:61hc24ldfob3jp6i4asnpispp03gua1qk8@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 08 May 2008 06:12:55 -0400, Bob Willard
>> <BobwBSGS@TrashThis.comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>>OldDuke wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
>>>> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>>>>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>>>>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>>>>
>>>> Ask elsewhere
>>>>
>>>
>>>Ignore OldDuke. Most of us think this is a proper NG for the question.
>>
>> Of course you are WRONG.
>>
>
>Actually he is entirely correct. Everyone else, except you, thinks that
>this *is* a proper newsgroup for this question and you don't count because
>you obviously have mental problems.
>
Deal with it. Just because a few of you dumbasses thinks it is
appropriate does not mean that it is. Read the group title. That
says it all.

M
Mon May 12 23:44:10 PDT 2008


"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
news:81ih245uutr8d0bgs9ueupoq3pr45mgmmm@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 12 May 2008 08:15:58 +0100, "Walter Wall" <me@privacy.net>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
>>news:61hc24ldfob3jp6i4asnpispp03gua1qk8@4ax.com...
>>> On Thu, 08 May 2008 06:12:55 -0400, Bob Willard
>>> <BobwBSGS@TrashThis.comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>OldDuke wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
>>>>> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>>>>>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>>>>>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ask elsewhere
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Ignore OldDuke. Most of us think this is a proper NG for the question.
>>>
>>> Of course you are WRONG.
>>>
>>
>>Actually he is entirely correct. Everyone else, except you, thinks that
>>this *is* a proper newsgroup for this question and you don't count because
>>you obviously have mental problems.
>>
> Deal with it. Just because a few of you dumbasses thinks it is
> appropriate does not mean that it is. Read the group title. That
> says it all.
>

OK, I have read the group title. It contains the word *hardware*. You are
the *only* dumbass who thinks it isn't appropriate. You deal with it.

OldDuke
Tue May 13 16:52:44 PDT 2008

On Tue, 13 May 2008 07:44:10 +0100, "M.I.5¾"
<no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote:

>
>"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
>news:81ih245uutr8d0bgs9ueupoq3pr45mgmmm@4ax.com...
>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 08:15:58 +0100, "Walter Wall" <me@privacy.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
>>>news:61hc24ldfob3jp6i4asnpispp03gua1qk8@4ax.com...
>>>> On Thu, 08 May 2008 06:12:55 -0400, Bob Willard
>>>> <BobwBSGS@TrashThis.comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>OldDuke wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
>>>>>> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but it
>>>>>>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in the
>>>>>>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard connection?.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ask elsewhere
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Ignore OldDuke. Most of us think this is a proper NG for the question.
>>>>
>>>> Of course you are WRONG.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Actually he is entirely correct. Everyone else, except you, thinks that
>>>this *is* a proper newsgroup for this question and you don't count because
>>>you obviously have mental problems.
>>>
>> Deal with it. Just because a few of you dumbasses thinks it is
>> appropriate does not mean that it is. Read the group title. That
>> says it all.
>>
>
>OK, I have read the group title. It contains the word *hardware*. You are
>the *only* dumbass who thinks it isn't appropriate. You deal with it.
>
Yet you can't read the part that immediately precedes it: WINDOWSXP.
Anybody with an IQ of more than 5 (obviously your's must be lower than
that) can put 2 and 2 together here: WindowsXP + Hardware = questions
about hardware AND WindowsXP. If the OS is not involved, it is out of
place HERE.

Hence YOU are wrong. Just because you don't care if people post OT
crap here does not mean you are RIGHT, just that you TOLERATE it. I
don't. If it's wrong it's wrong. And the posts I point out are
WRONGLY posted here.

Walter
Wed May 14 00:17:13 PDT 2008


"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
news:i9ak24dql402en4aruc4shq7tldpolmr9r@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 13 May 2008 07:44:10 +0100, "M.I.5¾"
> <no.one@no.where.NO_SPAM.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>
>>"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
>>news:81ih245uutr8d0bgs9ueupoq3pr45mgmmm@4ax.com...
>>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 08:15:58 +0100, "Walter Wall" <me@privacy.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"OldDuke" <none@nobody.net> wrote in message
>>>>news:61hc24ldfob3jp6i4asnpispp03gua1qk8@4ax.com...
>>>>> On Thu, 08 May 2008 06:12:55 -0400, Bob Willard
>>>>> <BobwBSGS@TrashThis.comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>OldDuke wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 7 May 2008 17:51:46 +0200, "Andre De Clercq"
>>>>>>> <andre,declercq@pandora.be> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I have an RJ45 coupler which is supposed to be a crossover one, but
>>>>>>>>it
>>>>>>>>doesn't seem to work. Can I test it by adding a crossover cable in
>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>chain, so that the double crossing results in a standard
>>>>>>>>connection?.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why ask HERE? Does this have ANYTHING to do with XP OS? NO.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ask elsewhere
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ignore OldDuke. Most of us think this is a proper NG for the
>>>>>>question.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course you are WRONG.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Actually he is entirely correct. Everyone else, except you, thinks that
>>>>this *is* a proper newsgroup for this question and you don't count
>>>>because
>>>>you obviously have mental problems.
>>>>
>>> Deal with it. Just because a few of you dumbasses thinks it is
>>> appropriate does not mean that it is. Read the group title. That
>>> says it all.
>>>
>>
>>OK, I have read the group title. It contains the word *hardware*. You
>>are
>>the *only* dumbass who thinks it isn't appropriate. You deal with it.
>>
> Yet you can't read the part that immediately precedes it: WINDOWSXP.
> Anybody with an IQ of more than 5 (obviously your's must be lower than
> that) can put 2 and 2 together here: WindowsXP + Hardware = questions
> about hardware AND WindowsXP. If the OS is not involved, it is out of
> place HERE.
>
> Hence YOU are wrong. Just because you don't care if people post OT
> crap here does not mean you are RIGHT, just that you TOLERATE it. I
> don't. If it's wrong it's wrong. And the posts I point out are
> WRONGLY posted here.
>

I care very much that people post crap here. Unfortunately, you won't get
the message and stop posting it. Every post from everyone else is not crap
and entirely welcome. In fact if you did the world a favour and died, this
would be one of the most idiot and troll free newsgroups on usenet.