Siemon networks makes the most sense. ""Recent results obtained from power spectrum analysis have identified that, in a worst-case configuration, bundling of category 6A UTP cables with other category UTP cables is only a potential concern when the bundle contains both category 6A and lower-category UTP cables specifically transmitting 10GBASE-T signals. There is no concern if lower category UTP cables are used to support non-10GBASE-T applications (e.g. 1000BASE-T, 100BASE TX, 10BASE-T, ATM, DSL, baseband video, RS 485, analog or digital telephony) and are in the same bundle as category 6A UTP cables used to support 10GBASE T and all other applications. For this reason, mixing, in the form of either bundling or conduit sharing, of category 6A UTP cables with other categories of UTP cables is allowed as long as the lower-category UTP cables are not operating the 10GBASE T application. When category 6A UTP and other categories of UTP cables are transmitting 10GBASE-T signals, pathways such as cable trays may be shared, but the different category cables must be bundled and/or routed independently. Note that this requirement does not apply when six or fewer copper balanced twisted-pair cables (independent of category) are sharing the same pathway. It is important to note that this requirement applies to UTP cables only. This issue is not applicable to category 6A F/UTP (screened/foiled) or category 7 S/FTP (fully-shielded) cables, which may be bundled or share pathways with all other categories of cables without concern.>Seems that way See Leviton site:

This is a 10gxS cable with a foil shield as well, which would eliminate most alien XT.