# Why does the Mini literature push MoCA?



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Looking at the "Start Here" flyer, I find this quite bizarre:

"... via a MoCA network *(recommended)* or an Ethernet network."

and "MoCA network (recommended)" appears twice more on the same page. Now, I understand that a MoCA option is a great boon to people -- and I understand there are many -- whose houses are already wired with multiple TV drops, but without Ethernet. But, if Ethernet _is_ available, when and how would MoCA ever be preferable? That's a rhetorical question, since to me, the answer is "never"; but I assume there was some (misguided?) thought behind the flyer, and I'm curious to know what it was.


----------



## Aero 1 (Aug 8, 2007)

So tivo support doesnt have to troubleshoot ethernet, routers, firewalls, etc. They want the KISS principle, chances are that more people have pluses and pro and its easier to troubleshoot. tivo to ethernet and all you need to do is hook up a mini to coax. 

Its more of a subliminal suggestion for the average user so they follow directions in order for it to work at the recommended way that Tivo wants them to use it. There is a science to all of this.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Does it really matter much? To the user, whether using MoCA of Ethernet it will seem identical. All my Minis are on MoCA while my Pro, Basic, and Premiere use EThernet.


----------



## JWhites (May 15, 2013)

I kind of thought it would be the opposite with the ethernet being simpler compared to MoCA since ethernet has been around for a much longer time and are more familiar with it on routers and computers whereas with MoCA many people don't even know what it is, plus it's harder to troubleshoot remotely because of the variables with splitters and quality of coax and PoE filters not to mention possible interference and noise from other devices bleeding in. The simplicity of installing MoCA is a lot better than running ethernet all over, but with troubleshooting it's kind of the opposite.


----------



## LoadStar (Jul 24, 2001)

I haven't gotten my MoCA filter, and don't have a direct ethernet line to where the Mini is, so right now I'm using a Netgear WNCE3001 wireless bridge. It actually works fairly well. A couple of hiccups here and there, but usable as a placeholder until I can get MoCA up.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Almost all places someone would want to put a Mini likely already have a coax drop, very few will have Ethernet. So MoCa is preferred for simplicity.


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> Almost all places someone would want to put a Mini likely already have a coax drop, very few will have Ethernet. So MoCa is preferred for simplicity.


That's not what the flyer is saying, though. It's implying that MoCA is somehow preferable over Ethernet _even when both are already available_.


----------



## trip1eX (Apr 2, 2005)

Well I put mine on MOCA even though I have a CAT6 network.

I did it for a few reasons. One I never used MOCA before and wanted to see how well it worked and if it worked.

And two why not offload traffic to MOCA if I can and it does the job. It's unused network bandwidth in my home. Might as well keep Cat6 open for every other use. Not that I needed to do this but ..

Three, in my basement I had another device that was using the ethernet port. Instead of buying yet another switch (or putting the device on wifi) I hooked the Mini up to MOCA which is really what got me started using MOCA in the first place.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

wmcbrine said:


> That's not what the flyer is saying, though. It's implying that MoCA is somehow preferable over Ethernet _even when both are already available_.


I can think one reason it would still be better to use MoCa over Ethernet even when both were available... It isolates the TiVo traffic to it's own network so that there is no chance of traffic from other devices interfering with the Mini's ability to stream. If you connected them to the same Ethernet network you use for everything else and were to say transfer a large file between two PCs it could potentially use enough bandwidth that the Mini would stutter or lose connection. With the TiVo and Minis isolated to MoCa they have the full bandwidth of the network all to themselves.

Edit: I started typing this before the post above mine existed, but then I got side tracked and didn't reload before posting. I hate that.


----------



## hfcsyrup (Dec 12, 2012)

yea, what others say, it offloads ethernet traffic. in my case, my setup is highly unusual, streaming was hiccuping w/ ethernet whenever i was using my slingbox so i had to switch my mini to moca. (my setup was streaming from P4 over ethernet into wireless router into powerline into switch into mini, slingbox streaming over ethernet into switch into powerline into wireless router over wifi to my kindlehd; powerline was the smallest pipe so probably the issue).


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I have a combination of MoCa, Ethernet and Powerline in my house. I use powerline for a Mini in a room that doesn't have cable or Ethernet and I use MoCa to bridge the upstairs and down stairs because running a cable between floors would be a huge PITA and I'm lazy.


----------



## bfollowell (Aug 24, 2013)

I find it difficult to believe that transferring other files between devices on the network, a CAT6, Gigabit network mind you, could cause that much of a drag on the system. Then again, I have no reason to doubt you guys that say you've experienced it either. Either way, the whole suggestion of moving traffic from my CAT6 network to a separate "Tivo" network is intriguing. I have two CAT6 lines and two RG6 lines at every cable drop so it would be easy enough for me to setup MoCA I think.

Correct me if I'm wrong but, doesn't the Roamio Plus & Pro, and maybe the Basic as well, have MoCA built in. It doesn't need that MoCA device Tivo sells does it?

Thanks for a very interesting thread guys. You put this in a whole different perspective for me and I've learned quite a bit.

- Byron


----------



## JWhites (May 15, 2013)

Roamio Plus and Pro have MoCA built in. Premiere 4 and Elite/XL4 have MoCA built in. Mini has MoCA built in. All others including the Roamio Basic require the MoCA adapter. If you decide to get the adapter, I recommend looking around online and compare pricing.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

wmcbrine said:


> That's not what the flyer is saying, though. It's implying that MoCA is somehow preferable over Ethernet _even when both are already available_.


It is easier to troubleshoot (see the sturm und drang over the "Tivo doesn't support switches" thread). MOCA is simpler than ethernet for TiVo support so that's why they recommend it. IOW, it is "better" for them, not necessarily the user.

BTW: DirecTV won't support ethernet AT ALL for whole home ...they REQUIRE the use of MOCA (though, if you know how to ask, they will activate whole home on ethernet, but as an unsupported feature).


----------



## slowbiscuit (Sep 19, 2006)

Aero 1 said:


> So tivo support doesnt have to troubleshoot ethernet, routers, firewalls, etc. They want the KISS principle, chances are that more people have pluses and pro and its easier to troubleshoot. tivo to ethernet and all you need to do is hook up a mini to coax.


+1. This is the answer, see the 'Tivo doesn't support switches' thread for details.


----------



## poppagene (Dec 29, 2001)

Doesn't the moca port on the mini perform at faster speeds than the ethernet port?


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

bfollowell said:


> I find it difficult to believe that transferring other files between devices on the network, a CAT6, Gigabit network mind you, could cause that much of a drag on the system. Then again, I have no reason to doubt you guys that say you've experienced it either. Either way, the whole suggestion of moving traffic from my CAT6 network to a separate "Tivo" network is intriguing. I have two CAT6 lines and two RG6 lines at every cable drop so it would be easy enough for me to setup MoCA I think.
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong but, doesn't the Roamio Plus & Pro, and maybe the Basic as well, have MoCA built in. It doesn't need that MoCA device Tivo sells does it?
> 
> ...


You can do the same thing with Ethernet. You just physically separate the Network. This is how I have mine. So even if I used Ethernet on my Minis, all my TiVo traffic is separate from my other NEtwork traffic. The only time they mix is when the Tivos go out to the Internet or if a device on another segment of my Network accessed my TiVos.

Although I physically separate my network segments because I use all unmanaged switches instead of managed. But since I have over 65 device on my GigE network, if I did not physically separate it, I would have issues.


----------



## tatergator1 (Mar 27, 2008)

bfollowell said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but, doesn't the Roamio Plus & Pro, and maybe the Basic as well, have MoCA built in. It doesn't need that MoCA device Tivo sells does it?
> 
> - Byron


The Roamio Plus/Pro as well the Premiere 4/XL4 are equipped with MoCA and are also capable of bridging MoCA to Ethernet. The Mini is only capable of being a MoCA end point.

Even with a box capable of bridging, you still need to be able to get Ethernet to the box to complete the connection to the home router. For some people, like myself, with homes not wired for Ethernet and where the home router is not next to the Tivo box, one still has to use a MoCA adapter to bridge the Ethernet to MoCA at the router. In this case, all Tivo boxes are simply MoCA end points.


----------



## rfryar (Feb 15, 2008)

Dan203 said:


> I can think one reason it would still be better to use MoCa over Ethernet even when both were available... It isolates the TiVo traffic to it's own network so that there is no chance of traffic from other devices interfering with the Mini's ability to stream.


Not in my case. I have my Premire as my Moca server and my Roamio is my Tivo Mini "parent". So in my case it uses Moca to get to my Premire and then ethernet to talk to the Roamio.

Someday I should change my moca server to the roamio, just never bothered.

Rick


----------



## wmcbrine (Aug 2, 2003)

poppagene said:


> Doesn't the moca port on the mini perform at faster speeds than the ethernet port?


It doesn't really matter, I think, because the most traffic a Mini should ever see is about 19.2 Mbps, well within the capabilities of either interface.

But, in theory, MoCA 1.1 is faster than 100 Mbps Ethernet, yet not as fast as Gigabit. (They could just as well have put a Gigabit Ethernet port on the Mini, but see above.) In practice, I couldn't find a benchmark that reflected this, because the MoCA adapters all came with 100 Mbps Ethernet ports. :/


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

wmcbrine said:


> It doesn't really matter, I think, because the most traffic a Mini should ever see is about 19.2 Mbps, well within the capabilities of either interface.
> 
> But, in theory, MoCA 1.1 is faster than 100 Mbps Ethernet, yet not as fast as Gigabit. (They could just as well have put a Gigabit Ethernet port on the Mini, but see above.) In practice, I couldn't find a benchmark that reflected this, because the MoCA adapters all came with 100 Mbps Ethernet ports. :/


My main MoCA adapter has all GigE ports. But even when running PCs on the GigE ports it can't get the near gb/s speeds I get with my other switches. So I only use to to give network access to my Minis on MoCA and run my TiVo Desktop/KMTTG machince on Dlink GigE switches.


----------



## Keen (Aug 3, 2009)

It's probably because the common usage of a Tivo Mini is to replace a existing cable box. And if it's replacing a cable box, then there's guaranteed to be a cable outlet there.

Those who have wired ethernet plugs in every room are abnormally rare, the average non-geek uses wireless across their house, instead of ethernet drops to every room.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

The higher availability of coax around the house is probably a big factor. Moca also has the added benefit of potentially selling them more gear -- adapters and POE filters.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

bfollowell said:


> I find it difficult to believe that transferring other files between devices on the network, a CAT6, Gigabit network mind you, could cause that much of a drag on the system.


PCs are designed to use as much bandwidth as is available unless you specifically throttle them. So if you have two PCs on a gigabit network and you transfer a large file between them they will saturate the entire gigabit pipe until the transfer is done. (a multi-gigabyte video file could take a few minutes) We have several customers that will edit videos on a local drive and then save the output directly to a NAS or HTPC. Doing that will also saturate the network until it's done.

So while in most cases it's probably unlikely, it's still possible and using a dedicated MoCa network just for TiVo eliminates the possibility.



wmcbrine said:


> It doesn't really matter, I think, because the most traffic a Mini should ever see is about 19.2 Mbps, well within the capabilities of either interface.
> 
> But, in theory, MoCA 1.1 is faster than 100 Mbps Ethernet, yet not as fast as Gigabit. (They could just as well have put a Gigabit Ethernet port on the Mini, but see above.) In practice, I couldn't find a benchmark that reflected this, because the MoCA adapters all came with 100 Mbps Ethernet ports. :/


That's true if you only have one Mini, but a Roamio can support up to 11 Minis. If you had them all going at once then you'd exceed the capabilities of a 10/100 network but not MoCa. Unlikely, but possible.


----------



## buckyswider (Aug 31, 2003)

I had a mini-epiphany hooking up my first Mini to my R+. I was dead-set on using my existing hard-wired gigabit network. Then I ran into the dreaded "switch" issue. I was all set to troubleshoot that and replace whichever switches proved to be the culprit (there's 7 switches in the mix, with the most hops to the router being 4). Then I started thinking about the random issues I have with my network. Recently my Series 2 was on the way out and would beacon. I took me about 5 outages before I realized what was happening. Then I started thinking...how would my wife react if the bedroom TV (which will soon be run off a mini) went down because of a stupid network issue, or if I had to power cycle a switch or something else like that? 

So I decided, hmmmm, maybe I should try to isolate the video network so it's not reliant on all those switches? So I figured I'd have to run some more coax and stuff like that. But I misunderstood MoCA. It just works! (I had Cat6 and all digital-rated appliances). So now I've eliminated as many potential points-of-failure as possible, while getting all the other benefits listed in this thread (like preserving bandwidth on my data network).

As always, YMMV, but even with a fully-wired CAT6 house, I think MoCA is the better choice for me....


----------



## Time_Lord (Jun 4, 2012)

buckyswider said:


> I was dead-set on using my existing hard-wired gigabit network. Then I ran into the dreaded "switch" issue. I was all set to troubleshoot that and replace whichever switches proved to be the culprit (there's 7 switches in the mix, with the most hops to the router being 4).


7 switches in the mix? With a network layout like that I'm not surprised TiVo refuses to troubleshoot ethernet switches. I suspect you may have problems if and when you really try to load your network up.

If you need 7 switches in your home environment you have things wired poorly and I'd recommend you take the time to properly (re)wire your home. I have 1 - 24 port switch and I have all my ethernet wiring home run to this single switch.

In my environment I chose to use ethernet over MoCa, although I knew MoCa would work fine (I had to use the Roamio as a MoCa bridge previously to provide internet to a Verizon STB when I pulled the Actiontec router out of my network) for two reasons, I'm more comfortable with ethernet and have the knowledge and tools to troubleshoot any ethernet issues and secondly aesthetics, coax is stiff and thick (compared to UTP ethernet) which sometimes makes positioning the Coax inside and behind cabinets difficult and can put excessive strain on the connectors or exceed the bend radius for the cable.

NOTE:

RG-6 minimum bend radius is 3 inches and that's to meet specs for a 1Ghz test sweep, I suspect if you are using even higher frequencies the bend radius increases.

Ethernet UTP bend radius is 4x the diameter of the wire which should be well under 1 inch

Yes these values really do exist!

-TL


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Time_Lord said:


> 7 switches in the mix? With a network layout like that I'm not surprised TiVo refuses to troubleshoot ethernet switches. I suspect you may have problems if and when you really try to load your network up.
> 
> If you need 7 switches in your home environment you have things wired poorly and I'd recommend you take the time to properly (re)wire your home. I have 1 - 24 port switch and I have all my ethernet wiring home run to this single switch.
> 
> ...


I use over fifteen gigabit switches on my Network plus several GigE Bridges and APs. I have no issues. I don't have the ability to have enough home runs to every location from a central location. So I need to chain switches together.. But my network has been rock solid for eighteen years now. Thirteen of which I've been running GigE. Although I didn't have so many switches in use in the beginning.


----------



## Time_Lord (Jun 4, 2012)

aaronwt said:


> I use over fifteen gigabit switches on my Network plus several GigE Bridges and APs. I have no issues. I don't have the ability to have enough home runs to every location from a central location. So I need to chain switches together.. But my network has been rock solid for eighteen years now. Thirteen of which I've been running GigE. Although I didn't have so many switches in use in the beginning.


First you are obviously not describing a home network unless you have some giant house supporting hundred or more users/servers or your are simply sadistic and enjoy making your life complicated.

I'm sure you also don't have one long daisy chain but rather the switches all 15+ are run back to a small group (maybe 2) with spanning tree being enabled and you are using layer 3 routing some of them.

Of course we are no longer talking about consumer grade switches so your argument of 15+ switches is really not valid in this discussion when we are talking about consumer grade equipment and how its deployed.

Oh didn't think anybody used bridges any more, yes there are still some protocols that can't be routed but bridges have been replaced by switches.

-TL


----------



## buckyswider (Aug 31, 2003)

Time_Lord said:


> 7 switches in the mix? With a network layout like that I'm not surprised TiVo refuses to troubleshoot ethernet switches. I suspect you may have problems if and when you really try to load your network up.
> 
> If you need 7 switches in your home environment you have things wired poorly and I'd recommend you take the time to properly (re)wire your home. I have 1 - 24 port switch and I have all my ethernet wiring home run to this single switch.
> 
> ...


No, my home is wired properly. I have every room home-runned to the basement where I have my "Core" switch. This core switch uplinks to my office where I have the modem and router and another 24 port switch, which I use for all my PCs and peripherals. It would be impractical to put the modem/router in the basement due to humidity and poor wireless reception). Many rooms need to support one device, so those locations have their own switch which trunks to the basement core switch. All runs are full 8-wire Cat6. All switches are GigE. My network never experiences any congestion or has problems. It is well designed, thought out, and implemented.

I suppose I could home-run a new ethernet cable every time a device is added. But I don't feel like tearing my walls apart because I added a Roku in the kid's bedroom (for example).


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Time_Lord said:


> First you are obviously not describing a home network unless you have some giant house supporting hundred or more users/servers or your are simply sadistic and enjoy making your life complicated.
> 
> I'm sure you also don't have one long daisy chain but rather the switches all 15+ are run back to a small group (maybe 2) with spanning tree being enabled and you are using layer 3 routing some of them.
> 
> ...


All my network devices are cosnumer grade. All my switches are unmanaged.

I have over 65 devices on my home network. My router has four GigE ports and from there it connects to four GigE switches in a cabinet in a closet. This physically separates the four segements of my network. Since I use all unmanaged 5 and 8 port GigE switches, this allows me to have so many devices without having issues. So from this closet it feeds the other areas of my Condo. And each area has multiple GigE switches chained together for each segment. This causes no issues and still allows me up to 950Mb/s throughput between the devices that are capable of those speeds.

So for instance my thirteen IP cameras are mostly on one segment, TiVos on another, wireless mostly on a third, and my PCs and media devices are mostly on the last segemnt. So each device only goes through the router switch for Internet access or to communicate with a device on another segment.

But in one section I go through six switches to get access to some devices. I have no issues. These are all consumer grade Dlink GigE switches and Bridges. And I am using one Asus RT-N56U router for the main router/AP and two Asus RT-N65U routers in Access point mode. And I also use several Dlink Bridges with GigE ports for most of my cameras (and for my Alarm system). They are constantly sending a video data stream 24/7/365 over Wi-Fi to a PC that stores the pertinent video.


----------



## Time_Lord (Jun 4, 2012)

aaronwt said:


> But in one section I go through six switches to get access to some devices. I have no issues. These are all consumer grade Dlink GigE switches and Bridges.


I'm speechless... all I can do is wonder what would happen if you truly started to load the network up with traffic passing at or near line rate between devices on the opposite edges of your network.


----------



## Diana Collins (Aug 21, 2002)

Just to chime in....

One common issue I see in a lot of home networks (and businesses that don't hire network consultants) is distributing devices that need to interact across multiple daisy chained switches.

For example, in our network, I have all the wired workstations connected to a single 8 port switch that also supports the NAS that they all back up to. This switch is directly connected to a router port so that it is only two switch hops from the wireless devices to the NAS. All the TiVo devices use MOCA, and I have a MOCA bridge connected, again, directly to the router. Another port on the router runs to the opposite end of the house where I have a Netgear EX6200 running dd-WRT and configured as an access port with a 5 port switch. That provides wireless access at the opposite end of the house and Roku support in the bedrooms. The remaining router port connects to another 8 port switch that supports our Vonage SIP, two printers, a Playstation 4 and an XBox 360. So, all 35 or so devices are never more than one switch and one gigabit segment from the router (an ASUS RT-N66U connected to a 75/75 FiOS link). 

Connecting switches to switches is something to avoid because all you end up doing is forcing more and more devices to share a single gigabit segment. You especially don't want to get into a situation where multiple high bandwidth sessions are sharing a segment.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

This is why I have four segments on my network. My three unRAID setups and media players are all on the same segment so that traffic doesn't interfere with my camera traffic. And my TiVos are on another segement so that also doesn't interfere. I had to physically separate the devices or I would have needed to go to managed switches. Which would have been expensive.


----------



## malba2366 (Aug 19, 2014)

I think some of the posts on this thread perfectly show why they only support MOCA officially. Imagine trying to troubleshoot a network with 7 switches and 65 devices on it over the phone! It is also probably more reliable to separate the video communication on its separate network than trying to compete for bandwidth on a loaded network. Some smart routers offer QOS but all these things would be a nightmare for TIVO to offer support tech for.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

LoadStar said:


> I haven't gotten my MoCA filter, and don't have a direct ethernet line to where the Mini is, so right now I'm using a Netgear WNCE3001 wireless bridge. It actually works fairly well. A couple of hiccups here and there, but usable as a placeholder until I can get MoCA up.


Have you moved to MoCA?

I'm looking at a mini for a bedroom TV and annoyed at the lack of wireless.

TiVo is a Roamio Basic so no built-in MoCA.

Usage will be low. We've had a single TV forever. Nothing else would be happening on the network when it's in use.

Coax is on the wrong side of the room.

I can run Ethernet if I have to but I'm lazy and don't want to have to.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Robin said:


> Have you moved to MoCA?
> 
> I'm looking at a mini for a bedroom TV and annoyed at the lack of wireless.
> 
> ...


Try a wireless bridge to see if that will work for you.


----------



## Robin (Dec 6, 2001)

That's what I wanted to hear, thanks.


----------



## webcrawlr (Mar 4, 2004)

aaronwt said:


> This is why I have four segments on my network. My three unRAID setups and media players are all on the same segment so that traffic doesn't interfere with my camera traffic. And my TiVos are on another segement so that also doesn't interfere. I had to physically separate the devices or I would have needed to go to managed switches. Which would have been expensive.


You do realize that any prosumer grade switch like a Dell 2800 would do just what you describe, and more, with a single switch right? There's no need to segment traffic like that unless you can't home run the device or there's a need for physical separation (security concerns for example).


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> I have a combination of MoCa, Ethernet and Powerline in my house. I use powerline for a Mini in a room that doesn't have cable or Ethernet and I use MoCa to bridge the upstairs and down stairs because running a cable between floors would be a huge PITA and I'm lazy.


Same. I should have gotten another MoCA bridge and killed off the Powerline, but I'm only living here for another 6 months, so no point now. I hope to own a home sooner or later, and when I do, the drill and a few thousand feet of CAT-6 UTP are coming out. My network has the router and modem upstairs (main level), my XL4 downstairs (basement), with a PowerLine bridge and 4 switches in-between, then the Minis (including one right next to the router) get their network connectivity through the XL4. So if someone streams Netflix on the upstairs Mini, the DOCSIS signal comes in at ~400mhz in the basement, goes on coax to the modem upstairs, through the router, through Powerline to the basement, through Ethernet to the XL4, then via MoCA at ~1150mhz up to the TiVo Mini. It works fine for a cobbled together network and supports 4 users who all stream, use TiVo to varying degrees, etc. We have probably 30-40 devices in total.



bfollowell said:


> I find it difficult to believe that transferring other files between devices on the network, a CAT6, Gigabit network mind you, could cause that much of a drag on the system.


My laptop and HTPC can saturate a gig connection, and that's writing to hard drives.



Time_Lord said:


> If you need 7 switches in your home environment you have things wired poorly and I'd recommend you take the time to properly (re)wire your home. I have 1 - 24 port switch and I have all my ethernet wiring home run to this single switch.


Yes, in theory, everything should be home run. That's not always the reality. My parents have basically two parts of the network, with a single gig connection between them. Internet for their streaming devices has to go through their router, a gig switch, a gig router set up as a switch/AP, and another gig switch, and it works fine. Half of their stuff is running through the wireless on their super fast WRT-54Gv.1, but that's another story. When I lived there or visit, my wireless stuff all ran/runs through the secondary router, which is N600, and my laptop had hardwired gig to the daisy-chained "backbone".

They could get it to be a more home-run topology, but it would require more in-wall wiring, and they can't be bothered, since it works fine now. We've already run around a quarter mile of Ethernet through their house, and if we did a full wire job with RG-6 and Ethernet to every room, it would be several miles of wire.



Time_Lord said:


> First you are obviously not describing a home network unless you have some giant house supporting hundred or more users/servers or your are simply sadistic and enjoy making your life complicated.


ROFL. I have to admit, aaronwt's network is pretty darn impressive!



aaronwt said:


> All my network devices are cosnumer grade. All my switches are unmanaged. ...


That's totally awesome! You got me beat! I'm at a wimpy 35 DHCP clients on my RT-N66U right now, including all of my roommates' stuff (although I have at least double what any of them have).

Hopefully, my next network will have an AC-68U fed by Ethernet from a FIOS ONT, with a gigabit switch distributing gigabit through a house!



malba2366 said:


> I think some of the posts on this thread perfectly show why they only support MOCA officially. Imagine trying to troubleshoot a network with 7 switches and 65 devices on it over the phone!


Anyone who has 65 devices and 7 switches has ZERO need for troubleshooting help, except maybe on an internet forum!


----------



## nooneuknow (Feb 5, 2011)

Yeah, arronwt has the most impressive "properly configured" network we will never stop hearing about. 

How many people can just say "Oh, let's try running it all through MoCA today, wireless tomorrow, powerline for a few hours, and back to ethernet the day after", with rates ready to promptly post here?

Seriously, while some have claimed his network infrastructure is all one bug kludge, and he should be using managed switches, the results he posts are impressive (and informative).

When I get around to setting up my three Netgear Centria routers/APs/repeaters w/internal drive bays, I know who I'll ask, if I get stuck on the wireless part. I'm still "that guy" who has one router, for all the wireless, in a fairly sizeable house, and it's right up against an outer wall, away from where the wireless devices tend to be...


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

webcrawlr said:


> You do realize that any prosumer grade switch like a Dell 2800 would do just what you describe, and more, with a single switch right? There's no need to segment traffic like that unless you can't home run the device or there's a need for physical separation (security concerns for example).


I don't have enough Cat5e runs to do that. I need the physical separation to avoid traffic issues. And it would be expensive for me to change my setup now anyway. I've got over seventy devices on my network plus fifteen or more GigE switches and several wireless APs. And I need to add a fourth AP soon. I seem to keep adding more and more wireless devices.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I don't have enough Cat5e runs to do that. I need the physical separation to avoid traffic issues. And it would be expensive for me to change my setup now anyway. I've got over seventy devices on my network plus fifteen or more GigE switches and several wireless APs. And I need to add a fourth AP soon. I seem to keep adding more and more wireless devices.


Can you list out everything that you have on your network? You've mentioned a few things? My list isn't nearly as impressive, but here it is, in no particular order, excluding my roommates' stuff, which is probably an average of 3-4 devices for each of the 3 of them:

1. Macbook Pro
2. iPhone
3. iPad
3. Kindle 3G
4. Kindle Fire
5. Moto G
6. SGS 3
7. Macbook
8. Samsung Blu-Ray
9. Onkyo AVR
10. TiVo Premiere XL4
11. TiVo Mini #1
12. TiVo Mini #2
13. TiVo Mini #3
14. Sharp Smart TV
15. Apple TV
16. Roku
17. XBOX 360
18. Wii
19. Wii U
20. HTPC

That doesn't include two routers (one acting as a switch), PowerLine adapters, and a couple of Ethernet switches. The Amazon stick is coming soon, plus a new iPad, desktop running Windows 10, smartphone, and NAS, all likely coming within the next year.


----------



## macwhizROC (Mar 14, 2007)

Diana Collins said:


> Connecting switches to switches is something to avoid because all you end up doing is forcing more and more devices to share a single gigabit segment.


I agree, but with one exception. If you've got a room with a stack of A/V equipment that have 10/100 Ethernet ports, it almost certainly won't hurt to stick an 8-port gigabit switch in there, off a gigabit uplink to the core switch. For example, my basement stack has a networked A/V receiver, Blu-ray player, Apple TV, TiVo Mini, Wii U, and occasionally the kids' XBox 360. There's two drops to the room. The Mini gets one of them, and everything else shares an unmanaged 8-port switch. Even if, for some bizarre reason, everything in that stack were banging away at full port throughput, they still wouldn't pump enough packets to flood the gigabit uplink.

But 24-port smart gigabit switches just aren't that expensive any more. Having half a dozen switches because you added capacity 8 ports at a time is just silly... And if it's a matter of not wanting to do so many home runs... well, make sure you're not just being lazy, but at least buy smart switches and run a few wires so you can use link aggregation between them.

My Mini on Ethernet will, once in a blue moon, lose the connection to its Roamio. Seems to happen near the hour, when recordings are starting or ending. I haven't seen that happen on another Mini in the house that's connected via MoCA.


----------



## buckyswider (Aug 31, 2003)

Right, and also remember that for the most part (with the notable exception of Roamio-->Mini connections) that vast majority of the traffic handled by each device is going out onto the internet anyway and not being served up on your own LAN. So your internet link is going to be the bottleneck well before any switch-to-switch link.

But that being said, it's another great reason to use MoCa for your TiVo network. It leverages the in-place coax without taxing the ethernet infrastructure. I put 1 drop of coax and 1 cat 5e cable into every room of my house (and even out to the barn) many years ago, pulling through walls and underground and every which way. So I have now added many 'room' switches as demand has grown. I don't think I'll be using the xbox, wii, and roku in the living room simultaneously any time soon, though  . Although the Roamio may be pulling internet traffic (to service a mini app or stream) at the same time as another of them is in use in that room.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Can you list out everything that you have on your network? You've mentioned a few things? My list isn't nearly as impressive, but here it is, in no particular order, excluding my roommates' stuff, which is probably an average of 3-4 devices for each of the 3 of them:
> 
> 1. Macbook Pro
> 2. iPhone
> ...


I have these devices on my network

13-IP Cameras
4-TiVo Minis
3-TiVos(Romaio Pro, Roamio Basic and Premiere)
4-FireTV STicks/FireTV
3-Chromecasts
6-BD players(four Sony and two Panasonic)
3-HD DVD players
3-Rokus(one Roku 3 and two Roku 2 boxes)
3-Xboxes(two XBOnes and one 360)
1-PS4
1-Denon receiver
3-Boxee Boxes
1-Netgear media player NTV550
3-PCH products(two A400's and one C200)
4-Desktop PCs
4-laptops/Netbooks
3-Android Tablets
1-Android Phone
3-unRAID Servers
7-Squeezboxes(four Squeezebox Radios, two SB Classics, one SB Boom)
1-Xerox Work center Color Laser Printer/copier
1-Alarm System
1-NEST Thermostat
1-LG TV
1-Slingbox 350
1-Verizon Femtocell

I think that is everything. That doesn't include my three Asus APs, my Asus router and around 15 or more Dlink GigE switches.

 Holy Crap! That is 79 devices. I knew I was getting close to eighty but seeing them all written down..........

EDIT: I forgot about my NAS devics
I have
1-INTEL 4 drive NAS
2-Buffalo NAS single drive boxes
1-Dlink NAS(dual drive)

So that takes me up to 83 devices I currently have connected to my network. I have some other devices but they aren't currently hooked up to the network.

EDIT: I also forgot about the Actiontec GigE MoCA adapter I use with my four Minis. So that makes 84 devices.

I have several dozen over wireless(either with DLink wireless Bridges or wireless from the devices) and the rest are connected to the DLink GigE switches. As I mentioned before I physically have things segmented to avoid traffic issues. It works great and I can get up to 950Mb/s throughput PC to PC. So I see no need to switch out everything to managed devices since it works they way I have it setup. But if I didn;t have four physical segments to my network I would have issues. But I don't use any subnets or anything.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

macwhizROC said:


> But 24-port smart gigabit switches just aren't that expensive any more. Having half a dozen switches because you added capacity 8 ports at a time is just silly... And if it's a matter of not wanting to do so many home runs... well, make sure you're not just being lazy, but at least buy smart switches and run a few wires so you can use link aggregation between them.


That may not be practical, and not everyone needs that kind of bandwidth. Most (myself included) would be more than happy with a bunch of 1gbps "bottlenecks" in their network.



aaronwt said:


> I have these devices on my network
> 
> 13-IP Cameras
> 4-TiVo Minis
> ...


WOW. And that's all in a condo? Yeah, considering most of that stuff isn't using bandwidth most of the time (except for the security cameras) there's no reason you'd have to go to managed switches.


----------



## macwhizROC (Mar 14, 2007)

Bigg said:


> That may not be practical, and not everyone needs that kind of bandwidth. Most (myself included) would be more than happy with a bunch of 1gbps "bottlenecks" in their network.


Well, the moment you start doing backups over your LAN, those 1Gbps bottlenecks really do become bottlenecks. And if you've got a NAS device, you're probablyhopefully!doing backups...



Bigg said:


> Yeah, considering most of that stuff isn't using bandwidth most of the time (except for the security cameras) there's no reason you'd have to go to managed switches.


Keep in mind that a "smart switch" isn't a "managed switch".

Your basic consumer unmanaged switch is a plug-and-play device that has blinky lights and that's as far as it goes. They're cheap, but limited.

For a modest price premium, you can now move up to a smart switch. Smart switches have a management interface, and typically support limited link diagnostics, port aggregation/trunking, and VLANs (Virtual LANs). That last one is important nowadays: you can use VLANs to wall off devices for security purposes. For instance, IP cameras have notoriously poor security. If you are using a computer to collect the camera data (such as a Linux box running ZoneMinder), you can put the cameras on a VLAN such that only that Linux box can access them. To other ports in the house, the cameras don't exist. That makes it much harder for your cameras to wind up on some Russian voyeur site. You can also set up a guest VLAN, so that visitors can get out to the Internet but can't see your internal network. That's supported by many WiFi access points, too. Even Apple's AirPort devices support guest networks via VLAN.

But smart switches are not true managed switches; they don't have routing functions or centralized management. The trunking and VLAN functions are not as robust or configurable on smart switches.

Then you move up into true managed switches, like the Cisco gear that corporations buy. That stuff is expensive, and usually requires an expensive support contract. For most home installations, managed switches are overkill.

By the time you're up to 24 switch ports, it's time to look hard at the smart-switch category. The extra features are worth the extra cost.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

macwhizROC said:


> Well, the moment you start doing backups over your LAN, those 1Gbps bottlenecks really do become bottlenecks. And if you've got a NAS device, you're probablyhopefully!doing backups...


Does it really mess everything else up that badly? Can a backup even sustain 1gbps? I've been able to saturate a 1gbps line, but it's not easy. Most machines in most situations fall well short of 1gbps.



> Keep in mind that a "smart switch" isn't a "managed switch".


True. But can't a smart switch handle QoS even without full layer 3 switch?



> By the time you're up to 24 switch ports, it's time to look hard at the smart-switch category. The extra features are worth the extra cost.


VLANs are kind of interesting, and at some point I may look into them, but I feel like I wouldn't have any need for them, or any other smart features. Often, I want guests to be able to access my LAN, either for file transfers or remote controlling devices, and if I had security cameras, they would only be outward facing, so I wouldn't really worry too much about security. Besides, that's what a firewall is for.


----------

