220-1201 Practice Question: A customer wants to connect two buildings that…

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

• ✗

  Cat6a copper cable

  Why it's wrong here

  Cat6a copper cable is designed for 10 Gigabit Ethernet (10GbE) over distances up to 100 meters. For a 200-meter span between buildings, this cable type would exceed its maximum specified length for reliable 10Gbps performance, necessitating active network devices like repeaters or switches mid-span. Such an intermediate device would introduce additional cost, complexity, and potential points of failure, making it an unsuitable primary solution for a direct, long-distance building link.

• ✓

  Fiber optic cable

  Why this is correct

  Fiber optic cable is the optimal choice for connecting two buildings over a 200-meter distance due to its inherent ability to transmit data reliably over much longer spans, often several kilometers, without signal degradation. Unlike copper, fiber is completely immune to electromagnetic interference (EMI) and radio frequency interference (RFI), which is crucial for outdoor or inter-building links where electrical noise can be a concern. Furthermore, it provides superior bandwidth capacity, easily supporting current and future high-speed network requirements.

• ✗

  Coaxial cable

  Why it's wrong here

  While coaxial cable can transmit signals over distances greater than standard unshielded twisted pair copper, its primary applications are for cable television distribution, satellite communication, and older networking standards like 10Base2 or 10Base5. It is not a standard medium for modern high-speed Ethernet backbones between buildings. Implementing a 200-meter coaxial link for contemporary network connectivity would require specialized, non-standard equipment and would likely offer significantly lower bandwidth compared to fiber.

• ✗

  Wireless bridge

  Why it's wrong here

  A wireless bridge could potentially connect two buildings, but it introduces several significant drawbacks compared to a wired solution like fiber. It requires a clear, unobstructed line of sight between the two antennas, which can be challenging to maintain over 200 meters due to physical obstacles or future construction. Furthermore, wireless links are susceptible to environmental factors like weather, radio frequency interference, and security vulnerabilities, often resulting in lower reliability and slower, less consistent throughput than a dedicated fiber optic connection.

Go deeper

Related to this question