Survey: Signal Integrity is Key to Extended Reach Implementations

Nearly 80% of respondents to a survey conducted by the TIA said they foresee a challenge maintaining signal integrity in copper cabling installations longer than 100 meters.

Feb. 7, 2026

4 min read

When the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) published a white paper addressing technical considerations and use cases for extending the reach of twisted-pair copper cabling systems beyond 100 meters, it also conducted a brief survey of cabling-system designers, installers, and users on the topic. The 5-question survey gathered information about these professionals’ perceptions, concerns, and expectations about beyond-100-meter (often called “extended reach”) circuits.

The most prominent data point in this regard came from the question, “What specific installation challenges do you foresee when implementing an ‘extended reach’ solution?” Those who took the survey could choose multiple responses. 79% of respondents selected: “Maintaining signal integrity over longer runs.” To that same question, 56% selected “Managing power delivery” and 54% answered “Obtaining warranty support with equipment vendors.” 26% selected “Controlling environmental factors.”

The survey’s opening question asked, “What does ‘extended reach’ mean to you?” to which multiple responses were allowed. 72% answered, “Longer distances without losing signal quality,” while 46% answered, “Better coverage in hard-to-reach areas,” 44% chose “New ways to push limits of existing copper,” and 30% chose “Managing trade-offs between speed, latency, and reliability.”

For both questions, responses referencing signal quality or signal integrity far outpaced all others.

The white paper and survey introduction coincided with the TIA’s launch of an initiative to develop a Telecommunications Systems Bulletin, TSB 5073 “Guidelines for Supporting Extended Distances over 4-Pair Balanced Twisted-Pair Cabling.” The survey asked two questions about the coming TSB’s influence on professionals’ decisions.

The survey asked, “How will TIA’s extended reach cabling project influence your initial design choices for projects where devices need to be located beyond 100 meters/328 feet?” Participants could choose only one option. Here’s how the responses to that question shaped up:

32%: I’ll incorporate extended reach cabling into initial layouts where TR expansion is impractical or cost-prohibitive
21%: I’ll continue to use fiber for distances beyond 100 meters due to performance and future scalability
21%: I’ll wait for final guidance and field validation before integrating extended reach into production designs
16%: I’ll evaluate signal integrity, power delivery, and environmental controls before adopting extended reach copper
10% I’ll reassess device placement strategies to optimize cable topology and minimize infrastructure overhead

Another question asked, “Do you anticipate that this emerging guidance will enhance your ability to deliver reliable solutions for extended-distance scenarios, or will it introduce additional complexity into your workflows?” Participants could choose just one option. Responses were as follows:

37%: Too early to tell—depends on implementation context
27%: It will significantly improve solution reliability
16%: It offers useful insight but may require adaptation
13%: I don’t anticipate it impacting my current approach
6%: It introduces complexity that may outweigh benefits

The responses to the question about design choices reinforce some commonly held sentiments about documents published by the TIA’s TR-42 Engineering Committee—whether those documents are standards or TSBs. Specifically, roughly one-third of respondents (31%) indicated they will incorporate extended-reach cabling systems once the TIA issues its guidance, while another 21% indicated they will wait for final guidance before doing so. From this author’s perspective, those combined responses affirm that the ability to cite TIA documents puts designers/installers/users more at-ease with a design choice than they are before such documents are published. Not to be overlooked, 16% of respondents chose the option referencing signal integrity over all others for this question.

1-Minute Lesson: A TSB is Not a Standard

Dec. 16, 2025

The responses to the question about additional complexity also, to an extent, underscore the existence of a “wait-and-see” approach (with 37% indicating it’s too early to tell how useful the guidance will be), as experts within TR-42 hammer out the performance issues and potential pitfalls of extended-reach systems. Another 27% apparently look forward to the publication of TSB 5073 and its enablement of significant improvement in solution reliability.

The other question in the survey asks if respondents “anticipate that implementing extended reach cabling topologies will require additional tools, training, or installation techniques for your teams?” Responses were:

42%: Yes, minor adjustments may be required
31%: Not sure yet—depends on guidance
15%: No, current practices are sufficient
13%: Yes, significant changes will be needed

We will continue to report on the progress of TSB 5073, providing insights from members of the TR-42 Committee when possible.