When we talk about passive computer networks, we usually think of wires, cables, and connections. If we have worked with networks before, the first thing that often comes to mind is a network outlet on the wall, and the idea of connecting a computer to that outlet through a network cable.
However, the complexity of passive computer networking goes far beyond this. In reality, this field has gone through a long evolutionary process that has led us toward an entirely different path. In the following sections, through a practical scenario, we will review the history and growth of the passive networking industry in Iran.
If we go back to the late 1990s in Iran, whenever we looked at organizations or visited government offices to receive services, almost all processes were paper-based. Filling out forms, signing documents, and carrying papers from one department to another had become a common routine. Every stage was completely dependent on paper documents, and all processes were carried out manually through paperwork.
As time passed and the digital era emerged, organizations gradually moved toward digitizing information and began using software systems for managing and storing data.
During this transition, concepts such as e-government appeared, which at the time were unfamiliar to many people. As a result, almost every organization established a room called the “Informatics Room,” and an individual was appointed as the IT or Informatics officer.The purpose of establishing these informatics rooms was to explore ways of transforming organizations into digital and information-technology-driven structures.
As organizations moved toward digital transformation, the lack of stable and reliable computer network infrastructure caused paper documents to remain widely used. Although computers were placed on many employees’ desks, people still did not fully trust them and continued to rely on paper for recording information.
At the beginning of this technological transformation, IT specialists themselves lacked sufficient knowledge and experience to properly manage these changes. As a result, IT managers often started by implementing small pilot network projects within their organizations.
In these pilot projects, one computer would be configured as a server while several others would connect to it as clients. This setup was designed to practically test and establish network communication.
Once these experiments proved successful and organizations gained confidence in the reliability of such systems, computer networks gradually expanded throughout organizations.
Although computer networks support different protocols and communication languages, the simplicity of operation and the global expansion of Ethernet-based communication eventually pushed organizations toward using a common language known as IP (Internet Protocol).
In this communication model, every device is assigned a unique IP address through which devices identify one another within the network. These are commonly referred to as IP-based networks.
Over time, many systems that previously did not operate on IP infrastructure were modernized and migrated to IP-based platforms. For example, CCTV cameras in buildings used to connect to analog control centers through separate coaxial cables, while telephone systems were connected to PBX systems through independent wiring separate from the data network.
Although maintaining and troubleshooting isolated systems was easier, they lacked continuous interactive communication between systems. For instance, images captured by surveillance cameras could not easily be shared or integrated with computer software applications within a unified infrastructure.
With technological advancement, most systems migrated to IP-based platforms and became part of a shared network infrastructure. Cameras, alarm systems, video systems, and other subsystems were all integrated into a common network based on the IP language. Gradually, the isolated network “islands” began to branch out and evolve into interconnected systems.
During this process, people working with organizational systems learned from the more integrated implementations used in other organizations and applied those ideas to improve their own isolated network structures. For example, they learned how a phone call coming into the organization could automatically connect to the network database, identify the caller’s number, and display the caller’s complete records on the screen when connected to the relevant person. This example demonstrates how different subsystems across isolated networks gradually became interconnected and evolved in an almost organic manner.
As trust in digital systems increased and integrated communication between systems became possible, organizations gradually moved away from paper-based processes and shifted toward IP-centric infrastructures. This allowed different systems to work together and provided access to more comprehensive data.
Consequently, managers and decision-makers became increasingly interested in deploying modern services, and expectations from Ethernet networks continued to rise. Organizations therefore began prioritizing the implementation of diverse and advanced services. This trend encouraged specialists to focus on identifying and deploying new technologies and services.
However, this focus on implementing new services also led to the uncontrolled expansion of isolated network segments within organizations.
The mushroom-like growth of these isolated networks caused them to become interconnected in a chaotic and confusing manner.
At the same time, neglecting the importance of cabling and connections within the concept of passive networking resulted in a “spaghetti-like” cable structure, making troubleshooting, expansion, and network modifications extremely difficult.
For this reason, telecommunication and computer network infrastructure became recognized as a major challenge. If any issue occurred within the passive network infrastructure — including cables and connections — identifying the problem within this tangled environment became extremely difficult, often requiring significant time and sometimes making fault detection nearly impossible.
IT specialists, who had previously focused primarily on implementing modern services and considered their main challenges to be related to active network equipment, now faced a much larger issue: the proper cabling of telecommunication and computer networks.
While dealing with cabling challenges in telecommunication and computer networks, specialists studied global models and examined similar experiences in international organizations. During this process, they became familiar with a new concept called the Structured Cabling System.
This concept introduced comprehensive principles for designing and implementing structured cabling systems. By applying modern methodologies, it provided a way to deploy different subsystems over a single unified infrastructure.
In addition to integrating isolated networks, this unified infrastructure offered features such as easier fault identification, scalability, flexibility for modifications, simplified maintenance, long-term cost control, improved system stability, and minimized downtime.
The principles of Structured Cabling Systems are defined by international standardization organizations. One of the most recognized organizations in this field is:
The TIA (Telecommunications Industry Association), which operates as a North American standards organization approved by ANSI and develops standards related to the design and implementation of structured cabling systems.
In addition to international organizations, local and regional standards bodies also adapt structured cabling principles according to the specific conditions of their regions and define localized standards.
Alongside other standards organizations, BICSI also plays a significant role as a professional authority in this field. In addition to contributing to standardization, BICSI provides best practices and implementation guidelines for designing and deploying structured cabling systems.
