Category 6A is recommended as the minimum standard for access points in most applications, including new ones such as Wi-Fi or those incorporating IP telephony; since most networks operate at 100 Mbps, 1 Gbps, or mixed speeds; speeds supported by the cables included in this specification.
Category 8: Work on the new 40GBASE-T 40 GB/s standard is well advanced, and all standards bodies worldwide have adhered to the Cat 8 principle for 40 GB/s over copper. Although the IEEE 40GBASE-T implementation standard is scheduled for release in the first quarter of 2016, many hurdles remain to be overcome.
There are two main options currently being debated:
• The so-called Class 1 or Cat 8.1: with RJ-45 connectors and improved Cat6A cables (An option apparently supported by the TIA in the USA)
• The one known as Class 2 or Cat 8.2: With connectors other than RJ45 and improved Cat 7 or 7a cables
Since the components for both versions have not yet been defined, caution seems logical regarding any statement about "Cat 8" systems or "ideal solution for Cat 8".
Applications: It's important to note that Category 8 is designed not for horizontal cabling with 100m links, but for data centers, where the length of connections between equipment does not exceed 30 meters.
Furthermore, this type of installation is better suited to the characteristics of shielded cables.
We reproduce below the comments of Ken Hodge, Technical Director of Brand Rex:
In the US, both data centers and enterprise LANs almost exclusively use unshielded Cat6A cabling, while in the UK and many other parts of the world, we see between 70% and 80% of data center installations using shielded cabling.
However, in the enterprise sector, this changes considerably. For example, Germany uses only shielded cabling, France tends to use shielded cabling in most projects, and in the Netherlands, the situation is similar to that of the UK, with 80% preferring unshielded cabling versus 20% preferring shielded cabling.
It is certainly true that shielded Cat6A cabling is a much better solution from a technical standpoint than unshielded cabling due to its greater resistance to external crosstalk and other electromagnetic interference. Furthermore, it is safer because it does not radiate the data signals it transmits. It is also typically thinner than unshielded cabling, allowing us to offer solutions such as Cat6A zone cable with a diameter similar to that of Cat5A cabling. The possibility of implementing thinner, higher-performance cabling in data centers has undoubtedly helped increase its usage to 70-80% in many countries.
While the occurrence of errors and retransmissions may be acceptable in enterprise LANs, it is completely unacceptable in critical data center areas, thus necessitating the use of more reliable shielded connectors and cables.
Moreover, in the case of data centers, the grounding and equipotential bonding issues often cited by installers as reasons for using unshielded cabling are irrelevant, as the entire system has an equipotential bond.
Regarding the use of an unshielded solution for 40 Gb/s, I consider it highly unlikely. Reducing noise sufficiently to facilitate high-frequency transmissions presents a challenge for unshielded cabling, and there is no engineering reason to support this development other than the excuse of having always used unshielded cables.
On the other hand, the application of Cat8 in data centers may force a change in their topology design if they end up needing 40 Gb/s; as detailed in the technical article "Will CAT 8 cabling force a topology change in the Data Center?"
Article provided by COFITEL
