# New MoCA 2.0 adapters now available: Actiontec ECB6000, ECB6200



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

An FYI... I just came across my first retail MoCA 2.0 adapters on eBay, the Actiontec ECB6000 -- which then clued me in to the ECB6200, as well. I've thrown together, below, some links to data sheets and purchasing sources, for those who may be interested.

*ECB6000 - MoCA 2.0 Ethernet-to-Coax Network Adapter:*
Product Info & Documentation
FAQ
MoCA 2.0 Certification​*ECB6200 - *Bonded* MoCA 2.0 Ethernet-to-Coax Network Adapter:*
Product Info & Documentation
FAQ
MoCA 2.0 Certification​*WCB6200Q - *Bonded* MoCA 2.0 802.11ac Wireless Network Extender:*
Product Info & Documentation
FAQ
MoCA 2.0 Certification​*Current purchase sources:*
Actiontec Online Store
AntOnline
Amazon (3rd parties)
Beach Audio
eBay
Provantage
... or Google​*​Related commentary:*
SmallNetBuilder thread re: ECB6000
Reddit thread re: ECB6000
SmallNetBuilder review of ECB6200
wegotserved review of ECB6200 and WCB6200Q wireless extender
PCMag review of WCB6200Q
SmallNetBuilder forum post re: WCB6200Q​I'll certainly be interested to hear how well these work, especially in a TiVo environment w/ existing Tivo/MoCA 1.1 equipment on the line, or in conjunction w/ a MoCA 2.0 gateway, such as Comcast's XB3 class.

edit: p.s. >See this post< for a semi-maintained list of available MoCA adapter products.

edit: Added add'l ECB6200 commentary from smallnetbuilder, wegotserved
edit: updated Actiontec product links
edit: added WCB6200Q info
edit: added link to available MoCA adapters post


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

krkaufman said:


> An FYI... I just came across my first retail MoCA 2.0 adapters on eBay, the Actiontec ECB6000 -- which then clued me in to the ECB6200, as well. I've thrown together, below, some links to data sheets and purchasing sources, for those who may be interested.
> 
> *ECB6000 - MoCA 2.0 Ethernet-to-Coax Network Adapter:*
> Product Data Sheet
> ...


I wonder if the Bolt will have MoCA V2, than the Mini will have to be upgraded. However I not sure MoCA V1.1 is degrading anything TiVo is now doing with MoCA.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

MoCA 2.0 won't improve Tivo functionality. You can already FF and RWD with zero lag on 1.1.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

lessd said:


> I wonder if the Bolt will have MoCA V2, than the Mini will have to be upgraded. However I not sure MoCA V1.1 is degrading anything TiVo is now doing with MoCA.


Isn't it backwards compatible anyway? No reason to have to upgrade the mini anytime soon, but I'm sure if they're still needed with the new Bolt design (maybe it's going to use thin clients on Roku, Chrome, FireTV, etc?) then they'll work on that after the Bolt's released and stable.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

b_scott said:


> MoCA 2.0 won't improve Tivo functionality. You can already FF and RWD with zero lag on 1.1.


It might make TiVoToGo transfers faster. With the Roamio Plus/Pro connected via Ethernet you can get speeds faster then even the theoretical speeds of MoCa 1.1. So with MoCa 2.0 you could probably get those same speeds. It might also allow more Minis to work simultaneously.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> It might make TiVoToGo transfers faster. With the Roamio Plus/Pro connected via Ethernet you can get speeds faster then even the theoretical speeds of MoCa 1.1. So with MoCa 2.0 you could probably get those same speeds. It might also allow more Minis to work simultaneously.


Precisely. If Gigabit Ethernet is worthwhile, so is MoCA 2.0 -- bonded or not.


----------



## herbman (Apr 8, 2008)

I believe MoCA autonegotiates to the lowest available speed between all devices on the network. So if you're going to be using these, I think you may want to use them everywhere on the network as Ethernet, at least with the current devices.


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

herbman said:


> I believe MoCA autonegotiates to the lowest available speed between all devices on the network. So if you're going to be using these, I think you may want to use them everywhere on the network as Ethernet, at least with the current devices.


Hi,
I am not sure that I am 100% correct, but I have read that the speed between devices is dependent on the MoCA spec on each device, so if you are transfering between MoCA 2.0 devices you get full speed if you transfer between a MoCA 2.0 and a MoCA 1.1 it will use the MoCA 1.1 speed. Also it appears MoCA 2.0 and MoCA 1.0 are not compatible.
Just to clarify, the entire MoCA network does not drop down to the speed of the lowest MoCA connection.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

fcfc2 said:


> Hi,
> I am not sure that I am 100% correct, but I have read that the speed between devices is dependent on the MoCA spec on each device, so if you are transfering between MoCA 2.0 devices you get full speed if you transfer between a MoCA 2.0 and a MoCA 1.1 it will use the MoCA 1.1 speed. Also it appears MoCA 2.0 and MoCA 1.0 are not compatible.
> Just to clarify, the entire MoCA network does not drop down to the speed of the lowest MoCA connection.


The MoCA 2.0 specs (overview) would seem to back you up...


> *Backward Interoperability Assured*
> 
> MoCA 2.0 nodes interoperate with 1.1 nodes on the same network.
> 
> MoCA 2.0 capable nodes communicate in MoCA 2.0 mode when talking to MoCA 2.0 devices even when legacy devices are present in the network.


But the wording "are present" seems unnecessarily non-specific. Does "are present" also include the case where the MoCA 1.1 devices must communicate through the MoCA 2.0 bridge, rather than through a separate MoCA 1.1 bridge?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

If it's being bridged then it doesn't know the other side of the network is MoCa 2.0. That's the whole point of bridging, it's transparent to each half of the network.


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

krkaufman said:


> The MoCA 2.0 specs (overview) would seem to back you up...
> 
> But the wording "are present" seems unnecessarily non-specific. Does "are present" also include the case where the MoCA 1.1 devices must communicate through the MoCA 2.0 bridge, rather than through a separate MoCA 1.1 bridge?


Hi,
My understanding of MoCA is that although one device normally gets elected to establish a network it does not otherwise place any controls on the other devices that then connect to each other directly. I am not exactly sure how this works with Tivo's implementation of "MoCA" because the minis only seem to act as primarily one way/ receiving devices for data which is why they cannot act as bridges for other devices via the ethernet port. Sorry if this is poorly worded.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

fcfc2 said:


> Hi,
> My understanding of MoCA is that although one device normally gets elected to establish a network it does not otherwise place any controls on the other devices that then connect to each other directly. I am not exactly sure how this works with Tivo's implementation of "MoCA" because the minis only seem to act as primarily one way/ receiving devices for data which is why they cannot act as bridges for other devices via the ethernet port. Sorry if this is poorly worded.


I don't expect the Minis to be a special case merely for their only having "adapter" MoCa capabilities. The main question I have is how a MoCA 2.0 bridging adapter would perform if it were the single bridge for both MoCA 2.0 *and* MoCA 1.1 "adapter" devices operating (actively transferring data) simultaneously. I'll be pleasantly surprised if the MoCA 2.0 bridge is able to hit/maintain MoCA 2.0 spec'd speeds w/ a MoCA 2.0 adapter in this scenario. (edit: The specs seem to indicate this will be the case, but I guess I'm pessimistic.)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I might buy a pair of the 2.0 bonded adapters and see how they work. Right now I have two networks, one upstairs and one down stairs bridged via a MoCa 1.1 network. It works OK but speeds are slowed due to the 10/100 port on the MoCa bridges I'm using. I was looking at buying newer bridges anyway, with gigabit ports, but now that these are out I might just get a couple and see if I can get full gigabit speeds across the coax. (I might need to pull new wire though as part of the leg between floors is still using RG59 )


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> I might buy a pair of the 2.0 bonded adapters and see how they work. Right now I have two networks, one upstairs and one down stairs bridged via a MoCa 1.1 network. It works OK but speeds are slowed due to the 10/100 port on the MoCa bridges I'm using. I was looking at buying newer bridges anyway, with gigabit ports, but now that these are out I might just get a couple and see if I can get full gigabit speeds across the coax. (I might need to pull new wire though as part of the leg between floors is still using RG59 )


For what you're looking at doing, you may want to dig into the ECB6200 (bonded) adapter's MoCA 2.0 "turbo" mode.


> *"Turbo" mode for a point-to-point configuration that allows*
> 
> 500+ Mbps MAC throughput between two connected devices when operating in Baseline mode
> 
> 1+ Gbps MAC throughput when operating in Enhanced mode.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

That's what I was looking at, but no one seems to have them in stock. 

I need those ones anyway because I use the pass through on my existing ones. Otherwise I'd need to split the cable yet again.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> That's what I was looking at, but no one seems to have them in stock.


Amazon 3rd parties? (pair for ~$200)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

That seems like too much. I found several places with them listed for $170, which I assume is the MSRP, but none of them have stock yet. Not even the Actiontec website has them in stock. So I'm skeptical of these Amazon 3rd parties claiming to have stock and charging a $30 premium for the pair.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

Dan203 said:


> That seems like too much. I found several places with them listed for $170, which I assume is the MSRP, but none of them have stock yet. Not even the Actiontec website has them in stock. So I'm skeptical of these Amazon 3rd parties claiming to have stock and charging a $30 premium for the pair.


But you're a "Super Moderator" worth millions, what's 30 clams to you man!


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I wish I was worth millions.

The other issue is returnability. I'd rather wait for them to be sold by Amazon so that if they don't work, or cause issues with the Minis, I can easily return them.


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

Hi guys,
I just noticed that the older Actiontec MoCA adapters and their Network Extender Kit have dropped since the release of their MoCA 2.0 devices.
http://www.amazon.com/Actiontec-Eth...=UTF8&qid=1441195612&sr=8-6&keywords=wcb3000n
http://www.amazon.com/Actiontec-Dua...=UTF8&qid=1441195612&sr=8-2&keywords=wcb3000n
Still no sign of this one at the Retail level though,
http://www.actiontec.com/329.html


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

Dan203 said:


> It might make TiVoToGo transfers faster. With the Roamio Plus/Pro connected via Ethernet you can get speeds faster then even the theoretical speeds of MoCa 1.1. So with MoCa 2.0 you could probably get those same speeds. It might also allow more Minis to work simultaneously.


no, because you're still limited by Wifi speed, which is well below Gigabit.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

b_scott said:


> no, because you're still limited by Wifi speed, which is well below Gigabit.


TiVoToGo is the feature that allows you to transfer from TiVo to a PC. No wifi required. I guess if you're using a laptop then you might be using wifi, but you don't have to. You could plug it into Ethernet.

TiVo Stream transfers to the iOS app do require wifi, but they're much smaller files so they don't require the same bandwidth as TTG transfers which are full size recordings.

In my case my desktop PC is connected to a gigabit network upstairs which is bridged to my TiVos downstairs using a MoCa bridge. The speed I get transferring TiVo to PC is capped by the 10/100 Ethernet port on the MoCa bridge. If I run a long Ethernet cable down to the TiVo I can get speeds 5-6x what I get with the MoCa bridge. My hope is that using a 2.0 adapter I could get full speed transfers over the MoCa bridge.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

after all that dealing with cables and extra work, the file would already be transferred with MOCA 1.1. Please most people these days use wifi laptops/tablets exclusively. Just saying.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I'm already using MoCa, so for me there are no extra cables. It's just swapping the MoCa 1.1 adapters for MoCa 2.0 adapters.

Also 802.11 AC has a max throughput of 433Mbps, which is more then the 170Mbps MoCa 1.1 is capable of. So even on wifi you could see some benefits using MoCa 2.0.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

b_scott said:


> after all that dealing with cables and extra work, the file would already be transferred with MOCA 1.1. Please most people these days use wifi laptops/tablets exclusively. Just saying.


Most people aren't offloading videos from their TiVos for archival, or worrying about maximizing their network throughput. Most people are lucky if they recognize that they're not getting their spec'd dl/ul rates from their ISP.

So I would agree that MoCA 2.0 might be unnecessary for most people. But TCFers aren't most people.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> I might buy a pair of the 2.0 bonded adapters and see how they work. Right now I have two networks, one upstairs and one down stairs bridged via a MoCa 1.1 network. It works OK but speeds are slowed due to the 10/100 port on the MoCa bridges I'm using. I was looking at buying newer bridges anyway, with gigabit ports, but now that these are out I might just get a couple and see if I can get full gigabit speeds across the coax. (I might need to pull new wire though as part of the leg between floors is still using RG59 )


I would be surprised if you can get anywhere close to GigE speeds. At least based on my Actiontec MoCA adapter with four GigE ports I have. Even transferring between two PCs on the GigE switch ports only got me 500Mb/s to 600Mb/s speeds. Compared to the normal 950Mb/s speeds I get with Dlink and Netgear GigE switches. Which is why I had to change my plans and not connect any PC directly to those Actiontec GigE ports.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Right now I only get about 92Mbps with my existing setup. So even double/triple that would be nice.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I would be surprised if you can get anywhere close to GigE speeds. At least based on my Actiontec MoCA adapter with four GigE ports I have. Even transferring between two PCs on the GigE switch ports only got me 500Mb/s to 600Mb/s speeds. Compared to the normal 950Mb/s speeds I get with Dlink and Netgear GigE switches. Which is why I had to change my plans and not connect any PC directly to those Actiontec GigE ports.


Your experience w/ the Actiontec ECB3500T switch ports doesn't really apply to Dan203's proposed bonded MoCA 2.0 connection.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

krkaufman said:


> Your experience w/ the Actiontec ECB3500T switch ports doesn't really apply to Dan203's proposed bonded MoCA 2.0 connection.


But it's still Actiontec. I had never seen GigE switch ports get speeds so slow before. I typically stay away from Actiontec stuff which is why I have five of the FiOS Actiontec routers gathering dust in my closet. But at the time the Actiontec MoCA adapter with the GigE ports was the best option I saw for the price. Without messing with any of the Actiontec routers.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> But it's still Actiontec. I had never seen GigE switch ports get speeds so slow before. I typically stay away from Actiontec stuff which is why I have five of the FiOS Actiontec routers gathering dust in my closet. But at the time the Actiontec MoCA adapter with the GigE ports was the best option I saw for the price. Without messing with any of the Actiontec routers.


But then the ECB3500T product wasn't really designed _or marketed_ for communication between the ports (i.e. as a Gigabit switch), so much as a means of providing max MoCA 1.1. capable speeds (170Mbps) to multiple media devices hanging off the device. Oh, and as a multi-band MoCA adapter that could be used across FiOS, cable and DirecTV.

I can't speak, whatsoever, regarding your experience with the FiOS Actiontec devices, but my testing w/ the ECB3500T, as reported previously, showed speeds around 890Mbps between the GigE ports -- and that was before I'd learned how to properly use iPerf and multiple streams to really push a network connection. Can't seem to find my results on the effective speed for the MoCA link. Grrr.


----------



## snerd (Jun 6, 2008)

krkaufman said:


> I don't expect the Minis to be a special case merely for their only having "adapter" MoCa capabilities. The main question I have is how a MoCA 2.0 bridging adapter would perform if it were the single bridge for both MoCA 2.0 *and* MoCA 1.1 "adapter" devices operating (actively transferring data) simultaneously. I'll be pleasantly surprised if the MoCA 2.0 bridge is able to hit/maintain MoCA 2.0 spec'd speeds w/ a MoCA 2.0 adapter in this scenario. (edit: The specs seem to indicate this will be the case, but I guess I'm pessimistic.)


I believe the MoCA 2.0 standard uses additional frequency bands which are independent of the MoCA 1.1 standard. As a result, adapters of both types can be mixed on the same coax, and two MoCA 2.0 devices can communicate at full speed while the MoCA 1.1 devices won't even see those signals. When the MoCA 1.1 devices need to talk to any other device, they operate using the MoCA 1.1 frequencies at the lower speeds. I'm pretty sure they are fully compatible, unlike old 10/100 Ethernet hubs which can only function at the speed of the slowest device hooked to the hub.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

krkaufman said:


> But then the ECB3500T product wasn't really designed _or marketed_ for communication between the ports (i.e. as a Gigabit switch), so much as a means of providing max MoCA 1.1. capable speeds (170Mbps) to multiple media devices hanging off the device. Oh, and as a multi-band MoCA adapter that could be used across FiOS, cable and DirecTV.
> 
> I can't speak, whatsoever, regarding your experience with the FiOS Actiontec devices, but my testing w/ the ECB3500T, as reported previously, showed speeds around 890Mbps between the GigE ports -- and that was before I'd learned how to properly use iPerf and multiple streams to really push a network connection. Can't seem to find my results on the effective speed for the MoCA link. Grrr.


I only did realtime averaging when testing throughput. Maybe I have a defective ECB3500T. I don't know. I didn't spend alot of time with it since I've never been a fan of their FiOS supplied routers. Since the Asus and Dlink routers I've used always ran circles around them.

In the end I just have my four minis connected to the ECB3500T with MoCA, and one GigE port connected to the TiVo portion of my network. So I don't need the high throughput in that setup, that I've always been able to get with my Dlink and Netgear switches.

I do wonder if there will be more speed improvements with the Bolt. Since the Roamio can get something like 220Mb/s transfer rates to a PC, i wonder if the bolt will increase that. Plus have MoCA 2.0 on board. And then be used with these new AT MoCA 2.0 devices.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I do wonder if there will be more speed improvements with the Bolt. Since the Roamio can get something like 220Mb/s transfer rates to a PC, i wonder if the bolt will increase that. Plus have MoCA 2.0 on board. And then be used with these new AT MoCA 2.0 devices.


If the Bolt is to support UHD 4K, I have to wonder (hope) the same, whether they'll bump MoCA up to 2.0. (Though you'd think something would have slipped-out re: MoCA 2.0 certification, by now.)


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Video still isn't that high bitrate in terms of network speeds and realtime playback. Even a 4K stream will max out somewhere in the 30Mbps range. MoCa 1.1 is capable of 170Mbps which is more then enough for multiple Minis even when streaming 4K. Although MoCa 2.0 would be nice.

The main limitation when transferring something to a PC is the TiVo itself has to remux and reencrypt the video. So it's basically CPU bound, not network bound. If the Bolt uses a faster CPU then it will likely have higher transfer rates when using gigabit.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

W/ the talk of 4K support via Broadcom chips, the new 4K device(s) may get MoCA 2.0 by default.

http://investor.broadcom.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=899162


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

krkaufman said:


> W/ the talk of 4K support via Broadcom chips, the new 4K device(s) may get MoCA 2.0 by default.
> 
> http://investor.broadcom.com/releasedetail.cfm?releaseid=899162


I didn't se ethat chip before. I had found the BCM7438 when looking earlier that supports HEVC. Which I guess is older.
https://www.broadcom.com/products/set-top-box-and-media-processors/multimedia-processors/bcm7438

I see those newer chips support the High Efficiency Video Codec (HEVC) standard and Google VP9 technology.
But I don't see a spec page for them. Just a press release.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I didn't se ethat chip before. ...
> 
> I see those newer chips support the High Efficiency Video Codec (HEVC) standard and Google VP9 technology. But I don't see a spec page for them. Just a press release.


Yeah, and there's no guarantee those are the chips going into the Bolt 4K; but it opens the possibility.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

If the bolt is on the verge of release then it's likely using a chip that's been available for at least a year, not something brand new.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

Yeah the chip won't likely be from 2015. The chip Broadcom and Tivo plugged in the demonstration last summer was the BCM7445. It could have changed since, but who knows.

The 7445 is kind of a beast if that's what they ultimately went with... Quad-core Cortex A15 at 1.5GHz, 21,000 DMIPs vs. the Roamio's 3000 DMIPs. 4 integrated transcode streams. 

There are lower-end models too... dual-core, 10,000 dmips with 2 transcode streams.

Moca 2.0 is standard across the board. Only question is how many streams they wanted to pony up for. I can't imagine they'd go with discrete chips again if these features are on the die.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Yeah I think one of their cost saving mesures for the Bolt will be to use the transcoder on the chip. IIRC the chip used for the Roamio also has transcoding abilities, but it's only two streams and may not be very fast which could be why they went with the add-on chip. But this one sounds a lot more capable so it might be a suitable replacement.


----------



## drhump (Oct 13, 2003)

i got 2 of the 2 device kits of the ECB6200 (ECB6200K02). For the most part they work great. I'm getting file transfers from my Synology NAS to Macs and Windows PCs in the 600mbps range. For whatever it's worth, I removed all the MoCA 1.1 devices from my network because transfers were much slower with those devices still on the wire.

I do seem to have a problem with one of the devices, at least it seems that way to me. This one device in particular, when I put it on the wire, my 3 TiVo minis lose the connection to the Roamio Pro. It might connect momentarily, or allow me to watch Live TV for 5-15 seconds, but it eventually dies with one of a number of errors. Usually V70 (certain) or V87 (IIRC). I take that one device off, everything works fine. The odd part is all the TiVos, or any other device for that matter, can still get to the internet when this is happening. I can do the TiVo service update or watch YouTube or whatever.

Actiontec support has not exactly been helpful. Their position thus far is that if you can get to the internet, it's not their problem. I guess I'm going to have to buy another one and eat the failed one.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

drhump said:


> i got 2 of the 2 device kits of the ECB6200 (ECB6200K02). For the most part they work great. I'm getting file transfers from my Synology NAS to Macs and Windows PCs in the 600mbps range. For whatever it's worth, I removed all the MoCA 1.1 devices from my network because transfers were much slower with those devices still on the wire.


Are your TiVos (DVR, Minis) connecting via coax (MoCA) or their Ethernet ports?


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

drhump said:


> i got 2 of the 2 device kits of the ECB6200 (ECB6200K02). For the most part they work great. I'm getting file transfers from my Synology NAS to Macs and Windows PCs in the 600mbps range. For whatever it's worth, I removed all the MoCA 1.1 devices from my network because transfers were much slower with those devices still on the wire.
> 
> I do seem to have a problem with one of the devices, at least it seems that way to me. This one device in particular, when I put it on the wire, my 3 TiVo minis lose the connection to the Roamio Pro. It might connect momentarily, or allow me to watch Live TV for 5-15 seconds, but it eventually dies with one of a number of errors. Usually V70 (certain) or V87 (IIRC). I take that one device off, everything works fine. The odd part is all the TiVos, or any other device for that matter, can still get to the internet when this is happening. I can do the TiVo service update or watch YouTube or whatever.
> 
> Actiontec support has not exactly been helpful. Their position thus far is that if you can get to the internet, it's not their problem. I guess I'm going to have to buy another one and eat the failed one.


What's the one device? Is it an Ethernet device or a MoCa device? Could it be flooding the network with data? Is it possible it has been assigned a static IP that overlaps with one of the DHCP addresses? If it's a MoCa device make sure it's not also bridging the network. You can create a loop that will throw all of your switches into a panic condition if you double bridge a single leg of the network.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> If it's a MoCa device make sure it's not also bridging the network. You can create a loop that will throw all of your switches into a panic condition if you double bridge a single leg of the network.


Have you tried swapping this device (I'm assuming you mean one of your 4 new MoCA 2.0 adapters) with one of your other non-bridging adapters, to see if the problem is specific to this one adapter or to how it's wired to the network?

You could put this "problem" adapter in one of your other currently working locations, and/or try one of your working adapters at the location you're trying to install this adapter.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

drhump said:


> i got 2 of the 2 device kits of the ECB6200 (ECB6200K02). For the most part they work great. I'm getting file transfers from my Synology NAS to Macs and Windows PCs in the 600mbps range. .........................


So is that the max throughput that you can get with those MoCA 2.0 devices? Or will the speeds go even higher?

If the speeds will go higher it could be a good alternative to an old Cat5e cable I installed in 2001 that has it's days numbered. I ran a cable designed for inside on the outside of the building. So surprisingly I am still able to get 900Mb/s+ speeds from it. When I ran more cable later I ran Cat5e rated for outside use, but I only put two runs in.

And ideally I need four direct connections. And now I am not allowed to add any more cabling on the outside. But I do have four of five runs of existing Coax outside I can use. And if I can get around the 900Mb/s+ speeds from the MoCA 2.0 adapters it would cost me much less to get four of the MoCA 2.0 adapters than tearing up the ceilings and walls to run new Cat6 cabling on the inside.


----------



## drhump (Oct 13, 2003)

sorry for the delay in getting back; crazy week at work. answers to the questions to me in order:



krkaufman said:


> Are your TiVos (DVR, Minis) connecting via coax (MoCA) or their Ethernet ports?


all of my TiVos -- 1 Roamio Pro and both minis (my 3rd one is not online right now due to a remodel project) are connecting via the ethernet ports. The only one with coax connected is the Roamio but that is for FiOS TV and not data.



Dan203 said:


> What's the one device? Is it an Ethernet device or a MoCa device? Could it be flooding the network with data? Is it possible it has been assigned a static IP that overlaps with one of the DHCP addresses? If it's a MoCa device make sure it's not also bridging the network. You can create a loop that will throw all of your switches into a panic condition if you double bridge a single leg of the network.


the one device i'm referring to here is 1 of the 4 Actiontec ECB6200 MoCA adapters. the rest of your question may be over my head. as for flooding the network with data, i don't think so, at least not at the time of my test. i powered everything down and added one node at a time to isolate the failure. turned off wifi at the router to keep my kids' truckload of iDevices off the LAN. as for whether or not the MoCA device is bridging the network, i don't know for sure how it works. The ECB6200 does not have a management UI. i believe it functions essentially as a layer 2 switch but i could be completely wrong about that.



krkaufman said:


> Have you tried swapping this device (I'm assuming you mean one of your 4 new MoCA 2.0 adapters) with one of your other non-bridging adapters, to see if the problem is specific to this one adapter or to how it's wired to the network?
> 
> You could put this "problem" adapter in one of your other currently working locations, and/or try one of your working adapters at the location you're trying to install this adapter.


your assumption is correct as to what device i was referring to. i have not tried exactly what you are asking but right now I have the problem ECB6200 offline and have a ChannelMaster MoCA 1.1 adapter with an integrated 4 port switch in it's place. everything is working fine, though it does slow the MoCA traffic down to the 1.1 speeds across the network.

also, when i isolated it as the problem, there was nothing else connected to it. in troubleshooting, i powered everything on the network down and disconnected all the MoCA adapters. I took the Roamio and one mini to the room where the router is and connected them directly to the router to make sure the TiVos were all working properly. as i started to put everything back in the standard configuration, the inter-TiVo communication crapped out when i put the problem ECB6200 back on the LAN with nothing even connected to its ethernet port.



aaronwt said:


> So is that the max throughput that you can get with those MoCA 2.0 devices? Or will the speeds go even higher?


sorry, i don't know the answer to your question. Actiontec seems to throw the 'gigabit' word around quite a bit but just over 600 was the best i could seem to get and it was pretty consistent. not sure if that's the max or that's as fast as my NAS could spit the data out. It's a DS214play. i seem to recall reading other reviews/posts of people who recently got ECB6200s saying around 600 is what they are seeing. Here's a picture from an amazon review (http://i.imgur.com/61xRe0w.png)


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

That would be a little faster then. That pic is showing a speed of 824Mb/s.


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

aaronwt said:


> That would be a little faster then. That pic is showing a speed of 824Mb/s.


Hi,
The MoCA 2.0 spec rates the speed for the "Enhanced" Mode as being 800+Mbps, so the 6200 version is apparently running in the "Enhanced" Mode. That seems like it's going to be the top speed for these devices. with the "Bonded" channels. With the standard MoCA 2.0 topping out about 400+Mbps, which is what I got with 2 Fios Gateway G1100 routers.


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

Actiontec has recently released the WCB6200Q Wireless adapter for retail, this is the bonded version with "AC" wireless. You can only find it on the Actiontec site right now and it is a steep $150 plus shipping and tax.
http://www.actiontec.com/329.html


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

fcfc2 said:


> Actiontec has recently released the WCB6200Q Wireless adapter for retail, this is the bonded version with "AC" wireless. You can only find it on the Actiontec site right now and it is a steep $150 plus shipping and tax.
> http://www.actiontec.com/329.html


Yeah, expensive, but only $50 more that a single one of their bonded MoCA 2.0 Ethernet adapters, at suggested retail, and you get 2 GigE ports along with the Wireless-AC. (yeah, expensive! Maybe wait until it's available somewhere other than the company store.)

p.s. Interesting that the filename for the product sheet indicates another possible piece of hardware on the horizon, a WCB6240Q...? (Ah, the 6240 has 4 GigE ports, per smallnetbuilder.)


----------



## JWhites (May 15, 2013)

krkaufman said:


> Precisely. If Gigabit Ethernet is worthwhile, so is MoCA 2.0 -- bonded or not.


Yes but the Mini does't support gigabit anyway so there wouldn't be a point for it to have MoCA 2.0. Now, a 4K supported Mini may very well have gigabit and MoCA 2.0


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

JWhites said:


> Yes but the Mini does't support gigabit anyway so there wouldn't be a point for it to have MoCA 2.0. Now, a 4K supported Mini may very well have gigabit and MoCA 2.0


Right. So wouldn't it have been stupid to not include MoCA 2.0 on the BOLT.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

MoCA 2.0 really has no benefit for TiVo. The benefit is for computer networks where you might copy files across the network, or download stuff from a 150+mbps internet connection. In that case, these things are going to be great for situations where you can't run CAT-5 cable.



Dan203 said:


> (I might need to pull new wire though as part of the leg between floors is still using RG59 )


There is no reason why this inherently won't work on RG-59, although it might not perform as well as it could if the run is long, and there is a lot of drop-off at higher frequencies. I guess try it and see.



aaronwt said:


> I ran a cable designed for inside on the outside of the building. So surprisingly I am still able to get 900Mb/s+ speeds from it. When I ran more cable later I ran Cat5e rated for outside use, but I only put two runs in.


There's no reason why the cable installed outside won't last for a long time. Also, you have two other cables, why not use them with VLANs or aggregate them and VLAN them? Those are better options than MoCA. I know you have more toys than the rest of the forum combined, but shouldn't two CAT-5e runs be enough with VLANs? Sure, they'd have to share bandwidth, but you could still keep things secure and separated.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Bigg said:


> MoCA 2.0 really has no benefit for TiVo. The benefit is for computer networks where you might copy files across the network, or download stuff from a 150+mbps internet connection. In that case, these things are going to be great for situations where you can't run CAT-5 cable.
> 
> There is no reason why this inherently won't work on RG-59, although it might not perform as well as it could if the run is long, and there is a lot of drop-off at higher frequencies. I guess try it and see.
> 
> There's no reason why the cable installed outside won't last for a long time. Also, you have two other cables, why not use them with VLANs or aggregate them and VLAN them? Those are better options than MoCA. I know you have more toys than the rest of the forum combined, but shouldn't two CAT-5e runs be enough with VLANs? Sure, they'd have to share bandwidth, but you could still keep things secure and separated.


I would need to switch to a managed network. I currently physically separate my network segments to keep local traffic separated. So for instance my camera traffic is on one segment and my TiVo traffic on another, media servers/players on another etc..So only when devices on different segments need to communicate with each, or Internet access is it going to go through the switch in my router.

But I have over twenty GigE switches in use and to switch them out with managed network GigE switches would cost a bunch. So I've been avoiding it.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I would need to switch to a managed network. I currently physically separate my network segments to keep local traffic separated. So for instance my camera traffic is on one segment and my TiVo traffic on another, media servers/players on another etc..So only when devices on different segments need to communicate with each, or Internet access is it going to go through the switch in my router.
> 
> But I have over twenty GigE switches in use and to switch them out with managed network GigE switches would cost a bunch. So I've been avoiding it.


You could get a pair just to negotiate a particular "pinch point" with tagged VLANs between the managed switches. It's a better and cheaper solution than MoCA. OTOH, the world wouldn't end if you just put everything on one big, happy network.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Bigg said:


> There is no reason why this inherently won't work on RG-59, although it might not perform as well as it could if the run is long, and there is a lot of drop-off at higher frequencies. I guess try it and see.


I just swapped my new Bolt in place of my Actiontec MoCa 1.1 adapter and I'm still getting essentially the same speeds with TiVoToGo, so it would seem that 10/100 ethernet port on the Actiontec was not the limiting factor in my network. I'm guessing it's either the RG59 or perhaps the length of the runs causing the slowdown.

Now that I'd only need one 2.0 adapter I might pick one up and throw it down stairs to see if it helps at all. Maybe the better modulation used by 2.0 will increase my speeds even over my sh*tty wiring.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

Dan203 said:


> I just swapped my new Bolt in place of my Actiontec MoCa 1.1 adapter and I'm still getting essentially the same speeds with TiVoToGo, so it would seem that 10/100 ethernet port on the Actiontec was not the limiting factor in my network. I'm guessing it's either the RG59 or perhaps the length of the runs causing the slowdown.
> 
> Now that I'd only need one 2.0 adapter I might pick one up and throw it down stairs to see if it helps at all. Maybe the better modulation used by 2.0 will increase my speeds even over my sh*tty wiring.


You need a couple of adapters to transfer files from computer to computer. TiVos are notoriously slow at anything. There is a certain scenario where a Roamio or Bolt can saturate a 100mbps line, but most of the time, TiVos don't even get to that point.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Bigg said:


> You need a couple of adapters to transfer files from computer to computer. TiVos are notoriously slow at anything. There is a certain scenario where a Roamio or Bolt can saturate a 100mbps line, but most of the time, TiVos don't even get to that point.


Any Romaio or Bolt will saturate a 100mbps line. My Bolts normally exceed 300Mb/s with transfers to/from a PC or to/from each other. Then a Roamio PRo/Plus will exceed 200Mbps. And a Roamio will max out 100Mb/s connection when transferring. So it transfers at around 94Mb/s.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> Any Romaio or Bolt will saturate a 100mbps line. My Bolts normally exceed 300Mb/s with transfers to/from a PC or to/from each other. Then a Roamio PRo/Plus will exceed 200Mbps. And a Roamio will max out 100Mb/s connection when transferring. So it transfers at around 94Mb/s.


300mbps sounds too generous. I know that they can get into the mid-100's. However, my point is that Dan203 needs to try computer to computer or computer to NAS file transfers to test the speed of MoCA and his wiring, not TiVo, which is notoriously slow and inconsistent with networking speeds.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I tried a computer. I get about the same speeds as I do with TiVo 80-90Mbps. 

I assumed it was the 10/100 port on the old Actiontec adapter, but aparently not becuase both TiVos at either end of the bridge have gigabit and I still get the same speeds.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Bigg said:


> 300mbps sounds too generous. I know that they can get into the mid-100's. However, my point is that Dan203 needs to try computer to computer or computer to NAS file transfers to test the speed of MoCA and his wiring, not TiVo, which is notoriously slow and inconsistent with networking speeds.


Too generous? 300Mb/s is conservative. The attached pic shows a 320Mb/s rate.

And I've seen transfers reported even faster than that with the Bolt. That transfer was a 20 hour recording. Around a 115GB to 120GB file that took almost 50 minutes to transfer. So that was the average transfer rate over fifty minutes.

This is with the GigE connection. But I would expect if I connected both BOLTs together, with MoCA 2.0, that I would get similar results as long as there wasn't a bunch of other traffic going on over the MoCA network.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I was doing TiVoToGo transfer to a PC. I wonder if TiVo to TiVo is faster? How did you get that detail screen?

Also I realized that the PC I used for my other test only has 10/100, so the fact that it maxed at 89Mbps might not mean anything.


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Dan203 said:


> I was doing TiVoToGo transfer to a PC. I wonder if TiVo to TiVo is faster? How did you get that detail screen?
> 
> Also I realized that the PC I used for my other test only has 10/100, so the fact that it maxed at 89Mbps might not mean anything.


It's on the Network Page. Network Diagnostics. Then Transfer History.


----------



## snerd (Jun 6, 2008)

aaronwt said:


> Any Romaio or Bolt will saturate a 100mbps line. My Bolts normally exceed 300Mb/s with transfers to/from a PC or to/from each other. Then a Roamio PRo/Plus will exceed 200Mbps. And a Roamio will max out 100Mb/s connection when transferring. So it transfers at around 94Mb/s.


On MoCA 1.1 (Roamio Pro/Plus) the max PHY rate is about 275Mbps, but this includes a lot of overhead. The actual max data rate is about 175Mbps. The numbers that appear in the TiVo reports are MoCA PHY rate, and do not represent the data rate outside of the coax.

MoCA 2.0 un-bonded has a max PHY rate of 700Mbps and max data rate of 400Mbps. MoCA 2.0 Bonded doubles both of these numbers.

Coincidentally, this speed difference is fairly close to the difference between mph and kph on the highway.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> Too generous? 300Mb/s is conservative. The attached pic shows a 320Mb/s rate.


That's usually fast. Also, why did you have a 20 hour recording?


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Bigg said:


> That's usually fast. Also, why did you have a 20 hour recording?


I use the large recordings to fill up the TiVo drives when I first get them. So over several days, I typically set all tuners to a manual recording for 18 to 20 hours each day, plus transfer more long recordings from the PC.

Both of my Bolts exhibit the same fast transfer rates.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Just tried a transfer from Bolt to Roamio Pro both of which are the MoCa bridge on their end, so about as straight a MoCa connection I can get. According to that transfer page I got 111Mbps, which is higher then 10/100 Ethernet, but less then the 170Mbps max MoCa 1.1 is capable of.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

aaronwt said:


> I use the large recordings to fill up the TiVo drives when I first get them.


Okay. Why do you fill the drives?


----------



## snerd (Jun 6, 2008)

Dan203 said:


> Just tried a transfer from Bolt to Roamio Pro both of which are the MoCa bridge on their end, so about as straight a MoCa connection I can get. According to that transfer page I got 111Mbps, which is higher then 10/100 Ethernet, but less then the 170Mbps max MoCa 1.1 is capable of.


Not ideal, but it could be a lot worse. Any chance that other devices were using some of the bandwidth?

How many splitters are between them (and how many "legs" on each splitter)? What is the upper frequency limit on the splitters? How long is the RG59 on each of the two branches from the PoE filter to each TiVo?

Just as a point of reference, the loss in 300 ft of RG6 is about the same as the loss in 175 ft of RG59, so RG6 is better, but it probably isn't causing your problem if the runs aren't too long.

I'm assuming you have 75-ohm terminations on all unused ports, and you've made sure all of the connectors are snug, etc. since you've been here forever and read every single post...


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

Bigg said:


> Okay. Why do you fill the drives?


To see if any issues crop up with the drive. And with an upgraded to to make sure it can actually fill up with content.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

snerd said:


> Not ideal, but it could be a lot worse. Any chance that other devices were using some of the bandwidth?
> 
> How many splitters are between them (and how many "legs" on each splitter)? What is the upper frequency limit on the splitters? How long is the RG59 on each of the two branches from the PoE filter to each TiVo?
> 
> ...


I rewired everything with RG6 a couple years ago, except the leg that goes upstairs. Its in a location that's a bit hard to get to. It basically runs all the way through an unfinished attic space, down a duct, then under the house. That run alone is probably 70' or so. That's where it connects to a splitter and meets up with all the other runs that are RG6.

I had an amp on the line for a while, and it improved my cable signal and MoCa. However twice I got randomly shut off by the cable company because they said my house was leaking EMF and violating their agreement with the FCC. We traced it to the amp so I had to remove it.


----------



## Bigg (Oct 31, 2003)

snerd said:


> Just as a point of reference, the loss in 300 ft of RG6 is about the same as the loss in 175 ft of RG59, so RG6 is better, but it probably isn't causing your problem if the runs aren't too long.


I'm pretty sure the curves for frequency vs. attenuation are different for RG-6 and RG-59. IIRC, RG-59 drops off more sharply in the 1ghz range, whereas RG-6 is typically good up to 3ghz. That being said, it can work for MoCA, it's just not ideal.


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

I have previously posted that adding a MoCA 1.1 device to a MoCA 2.0 setup does not automatically drop the entire MoCA network as long as the traffic is between devices on the MoCA 2.0 legs. With further testing, apparently it depends on which BRAND MoCA 1.1 devices are selected. A Verizon brand / Actiontec WCB3000N added to my 2.0 network did bring everything down to MoCA 1.1 speeds and it required a removal and reboot of the 2.0 adapters to return to the 2.0 speeds. I suspect the use of any of the Actiontec 1.1 devices will have this same effect. I don't know about the Premieres, Roamios, or mini's using MoCA with these 2.0 adapters and I have all Ethernet runs so I don't have an easy way to test myself.
My original tests in which the mixed network speeds remained the same were with MoCA 1.1 adapters from Motorola, Surfboard SMART Video Adapters and an off brand MyGica MC-2210. The MyGica brand are not configurable, so no encryption or manual channel setting is possible...they are quite a bit cheaper though.


----------



## snerd (Jun 6, 2008)

fcfc2 said:


> I have previously posted that adding a MoCA 1.1 device to a MoCA 2.0 setup does not automatically drop the entire MoCA network as long as the traffic is between devices on the MoCA 2.0 legs. With further testing, apparently it depends on which BRAND MoCA 1.1 devices are selected. A Verizon brand / Actiontec WCB3000N added to my 2.0 network did bring everything down to MoCA 1.1 speeds and it required a removal and reboot of the 2.0 adapters to return to the 2.0 speeds. I suspect the use of any of the Actiontec 1.1 devices will have this same effect. I don't know about the Premieres, Roamios, or mini's using MoCA with these 2.0 adapters and I have all Ethernet runs so I don't have an easy way to test myself.
> My original tests in which the mixed network speeds remained the same were with MoCA 1.1 adapters from Motorola, Surfboard SMART Video Adapters and an off brand MyGica MC-2210. The MyGica brand are not configurable, so no encryption or manual channel setting is possible...they are quite a bit cheaper though.


Did you power cycle everything at once? I'm thinking that maybe a MoCA 2.0 adapter needs to be the controller in order to ensure correct behavior of the system, and that it can't become the controller if it is added to a MoCA 1.1 system that is already operating? Pure speculation...


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

snerd said:


> Did you power cycle everything at once? I'm thinking that maybe a MoCA 2.0 adapter needs to be the controller in order to ensure correct behavior of the system, and that it can't become the controller if it is added to a MoCA 1.1 system that is already operating? Pure speculation...


Well, the circumstances do open it up for speculation. Sorta calls into question the whole MoCA 2.0 certification process, if Actiontec 2.0 adapters fail to meet the specs when on the coax with other Actiontec 1.1. adapters.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

TiVo apparently announced their own branded MoCA 2.0 adapter a few weeks back, which makes a LOT of sense for those new BOLT owners who need a separate MoCA adapter to create a MoCA network for their MoCA 2.0-capable BOLT -- or just want one to match the BOLT color scheme. 

The TiVo Bridge isn't yet available through the TiVo.com store, unfortunately; when it does hit, hopefully the price will be lower than what we're seeing for the Actiontec MoCA 2.0 adapters.

The press indicates that the adapter is standard MoCA 2.0, so in the 400+Mbps range, rather than the 800+Mbps for "extended"/"bonded" MoCA 2.0.

Press: 
Multichannel: TiVo Extends MoCA 'Bridge'

TiVo Shows Off New TiVo BOLT and More at CEDIA 2015
See the TiVo Bridge in action.

TiVo's multi-room networking adapter, TiVo Bridge, allows users to network all TiVo devices with existing coax cable, while still experiencing high-quality multi-room video at 400mbit/sec. While the new TiVo BOLT has a MoCA 2.0 network bridge already built-in, if your modem or router is located away from your BOLT, TiVo Bridge allows users to be plug-and-play ready - no more Ethernet cables!​
TiVo Blog: Can a MoCA Adapter Improve Your Streaming Experience?
The TiVo Bridge provides the highest-quality multi-room video at 450mbit/sec​







p.s. Query on availability posed to TiVo on Facebook, here.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

Looks familiar...


krkaufman said:


>


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

FYI... TiVo's finally released the "TiVo Bridge" MoCA 2.0 adapter for sale.

ZNF: TiVo Now Selling MoCA Bridge​
The dark side of this release is that a check of the TiVo online store's Accessories category indicates that they're no longer selling MoCA 1.1 adapters.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

Bit of a price drop on Amazon, today, on MoCA 2.0 adapters. The MoCA 2.0 adapters are currently below the MoCA 1.1 adapter prices.

Marking-up a post from a few days ago that included prices at the time, I've added CamelCamelCamel.com links for each product as well as their current Amazon prices -- with the major discounts highlighted in *red*.



krkaufman said:


> Unfortunately, the ECB2500C adapters aren't all that much cheaper than the MoCA 2.0 adapters; something to keep in mind when shopping. Another thing to note is that it's typically cheaper, per adapter, to buy MoCA adapters in pairs.
> 
> (1x) ECB2500C - $74 (CamelX3: $76)
> (2x) ECB2500C - $114 (CamelX3: $120)
> ...


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

krkaufman said:


> Bit of a price drop on Amazon, today, on MoCA 2.0 adapters. MoCA 2.0 adapters are currently below the MoCA 1.1 adapter prices. Marking-up a post from a few days ago that included prices at the time, I've added CamelCamelCamel.com links for each product and the current Amazon price for each -- with the major discounts highlighted in red.


I'm showing the ecb6000 2 pack as $99. Making me really consider getting these to replace my DECA setup now!


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

HarperVision said:


> I'm showing the ecb6000 2 pack as $99. Making me really consider getting these to replace my DECA setup now!


The price is $99.99 ($100), but, yes, that's the lowest the ECB6000 kit has been priced, by about $17. These are the lowest prices for any of the one-offs or kits, actually, since their release (per the CamelCamelCamel tracker, anyway).


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

krkaufman said:


> The price is $99.99 ($100), but, yes, that's the lowest the ECB6000 kit has been priced, by about $17. These are the lowest prices for any of the one-offs or kits, actually, since their release (per the CamelCamelCamel tracker, anyway).


Oh sorry, I looked at it quick and saw your $124 price, doh!


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

Could this be in anticipation of the release of 2.1 adapters?


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

remember you'll need a splitter for those one cable input models.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

waynomo said:


> Could this be in anticipation of the release of 2.1 adapters?


I think you mean "MoCA 2.5"... and possibly, or maybe they just think they've wrung-out all the sales they could at the introductory prices, and are now looking to expand the market to the more thrifty.


----------



## waynomo (Nov 9, 2002)

krkaufman said:


> I think you mean "MoCA 2.5"... and possibly, or maybe they just think they've wrung-out all the sales they could at the introductory prices, and are now looking to expand the market to the more thrifty.


I thought I read about 2.1. I guess 2.5 makes more sense considering the specs.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

waynomo said:


> I thought I read about 2.1. I guess 2.5 makes more sense considering the specs.


Heh, yeah, they got a little cute by, rather than going with "MoCA 3.0," they opted for "MoCA 2.5"... to match the 2.5 Gbps max data(?) rate of the new specs.
_MoCA 2.5 is an extension of MoCA 2.0, but is a version which bonds five separate channels together to reach 2.5 Gpbs. Today MoCA 2.0s minimum MAC rate is 400 Mbps but it can reach 500 Mbps for each 100 MHz wide channel it uses. By bonding 5 channels, MoCA 2.5 can get to 2.5 Gbps. MoCA 2.5 supports the bonding of either 3, 4 or 5 channel which means it can perform at 1.5 Gbps, 2.0 Gbps or 2.5 Gbps respectively. _(link)​


----------



## aaronwt (Jan 31, 2002)

krkaufman said:


> Heh, yeah, they got a little cute by, rather than going with "MoCA 3.0," they opted for "MoCA 2.5"... to match the 2.5 Gbps max data(?) rate of the new specs.
> MoCA 2.5 is an extension of MoCA 2.0, but is a version which bonds five separate channels together to reach 2.5 Gpbs. Today MoCA 2.0&#146;s minimum MAC rate is 400 Mbps but it can reach 500 Mbps for each 100 MHz wide channel it uses. By bonding 5 channels, MoCA 2.5 can get to 2.5 Gbps. MoCA 2.5 supports the bonding of either 3, 4 or 5 channel which means it can perform at 1.5 Gbps, 2.0 Gbps or 2.5 Gbps respectively. (link)


Wow! everything is going faster than GigE. Although I'm waiting for NbaseT. Which has 2.5Gbps but also 5gbps speeds over cat5e.


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

I'm in for a pair. I need something in my dining room. I have a Mini and it connects to MoCa there now, but I can't use it for my XBox. I tried one of the old v1 adapters and it couldn't pick up a signal out there, even though the Mini works fine and it worked fine in a different room. I'm hoping that maybe these have a stronger signal and I can pick up the MoCa 2.0 network hosted by my Bolt so I can use both the Mini and the XBox via MoCa.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

Oh, looks like the Actiontec bonded MoCA 2.0 Wireless-AC network extender is also on sale on Amazon, for $28 below its previous all-time low...
Actionec WCB6200Q - 802.11ac Wireless Network Extender with Gigabit Ethernet & Bonded MoCA 2.0 (CamelX3: *$121*)​
As is the (2x) Yitong standard MoCA 2.0 adapter kit, about $15 below its previous low...

(1x) Yitong MoCA 2.0 adapter (YTMC-51N1-M2) (CamelX3)
(2x) Yitong MoCA 2.0 adapter (YTMC-51N1-M2) (CamelX3: *$100*)​


----------



## thyname (Dec 27, 2010)

krkaufman said:


> Oh, looks like the Actiontec bonded MoCA 2.0 Wireless-AC network extender is also on sale on Amazon, for $28 below its previous all-time low...
> Actionec WCB6200Q - 802.11ac Wireless Network Extender with Gigabit Ethernet & Bonded MoCA 2.0 (CamelX3: *$121*)​
> As is the (2x) Yitong standard MoCA 2.0 adapter kit, about $15 below its previous low...
> 
> (2x) Yitong MoCA 2.0 adapter (YTMC-51N1-M2) (CamelX3: *$100*)​


Do you know whether the 2.0 Bonded adapter (6200Q) is compatible with the MoCA network created by Verizon FIOS Quantum Gateway G1100?

http://www.verizon.com/about/sites/default/files/fios-qgr-userguide140925.pdf

If you look at pages 7-9, it is MoCA 2.0 capable, but not sure about the "bonded" part.

I am not a "networking specialist", but from what I can understand, it will NOT supported "bonded", thus a 6000 would be more appropriate?

Due to my current set up, I have my G1100 CG creating the MoCA, and not my Bolt.

Thanks!


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

thyname said:


> http://www.verizon.com/about/sites/default/files/fios-qgr-userguide140925.pdf
> 
> If you look at pages 7-9, it is MoCA 2.0 capable, but not sure about the "bonded" part.


From the linked Quantum Gateway G1100 User Guide...


> *(pgs.7-8) *
> 
> Your Gateway features include:
> ...
> ...


... and the MoCA 2.0 specs overview page:


> *Baseline Mode*
> 
> 400+ Mbps MAC throughput
> *700 Mbps PHY Rate*
> ...



It appears that the Quantum Gateway G1100 is standard MoCA 2.0, but they're using the typical deception seen by many vendors peddling MoCA gear, advertising the spec'd PHY rate as though that is what the customer would see for an effective data rate.



thyname said:


> Do you know whether the 2.0 Bonded adapter (6200Q) is compatible with the MoCA network created by Verizon FIOS Quantum Gateway G1100?


It's "compatible" ... but they would communicate at the standard MoCA 2.0 rate (400+Mbps) if the Quantum Gateway only supports standard MoCA 2.0, as documented. (Any 2 MoCA nodes spec'd at MoCA 1.1 and higher should communicate with each other at the highest spec supported by both adapters.)

So, yes, the ECB6000 would be a more precise MoCA match to the Quantum Gateway than an ECB6200 adapter; however, the WCB6200Q product brings a bit more to the table, so the MoCA "overkill" might be acceptable if those bonus features are desired (i.e. wireless-AC, 4-port built-in Gigabit switch).



thyname said:


> Due to my current set up, I have my G1100 CG creating the MoCA, and not my Bolt.


Since they're both standard MoCA 2.0, you're not losing anything from a MoCA bandwidth perspective.

Additionally, you may be better off if you find the Quantum Gateway requires fewer reboots than the BOLT; and the BOLT will only be bothered when a Mini needs MRS support, leaving the Quantum Gateway to handle all streaming apps traffic for the Minis.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

thyname said:


> I am not a "networking specialist", but from what I can understand, it will NOT supported "bonded", thus a 6000 would be more appropriate?


Ah, I now suspect you may have been referring to the "WEB6000Q" network extender, rather than an ECB6000. Much like the WCB6200Q, I hadn't looked beyond the simple adapters and so missed the price drop on that extender, as well. (I've updated the listing, above, w/ the new info.)


> (1x) WEB6000Q - $149 (CamelX3: *$120*)
> (1x) WCB6200Q - $149 (CamelX3: *$121*)


And, yes, strictly speaking, the WEB6000Q would be a better MoCA match for either the Quantum Gateway G1100 or a TiVo BOLT; however, if they're priced effectively the same, I'd opt for the "6200" model. I'd also be interested in whether there are any other differences between these extenders, under the covers, beyond just their supported MoCA spec.

edit: p.s. Further, it appears that neither of the above prices are the best available, as the WCB6200Q may* also be for sale in the Verizon store as the 'Fios Network Extender':
Fios Network Extender *$99*/each​* The tech specs state this model supports "bonded MoCA 2.0," indicating it would be the WCB6200Q, rather than the WEB6000Q. Ah, this support page confirms that it is the WCB6200Q model, though it also indicates that only existing Verizon customers with a Rev I MI424WR or Quantum Gateway are eligible to purchase it:


> If you are currently using the Fios Advanced Wi-Fi Router (MI424WR rev. I Router) or Fios Quantum Gateway (G1100) , you can purchase a Fios Network Extender from the Fios Equipment and Accessories Store.



See also: Datasheet for Verizon WCB6200Q (PDF)


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

Seller on eBay w/ some decent prices on the ECB6200 bonded/extended MoCA 2.0 adapter, if eBay is your thing...

[email protected]$60 Ethernet to Coax Network Adapter Actiontec Bonded MoCA 2.0 *FREE SHIPPING* | eBay
[email protected]$110 2 Pack Ethernet to Coax Network Adapters Ultra Speed MoCA 2.0 *FREE SHIPPING* | eBay​Comparison retail prices, here.

edit: *NOTE:* Post updated April 6th to reflect current auctions and pricing.


----------



## lessd (Jan 23, 2005)

krkaufman said:


> Seller on eBay w/ some decent prices on the ECB6200 bonded/extended MoCA 2.0 adapter, if eBay is your thing...
> 
> [email protected]$69 Ethernet to Coax Network Adapter Actiontec Bonded MoCA 2.0 *FREE SHIPPING* | eBay
> [email protected]$69 Ethernet to Coax Network Adapter Actiontec Bonded MoCA 2.0 *FREE SHIPPING* | eBay
> [email protected]$129 2 Pack Network Adapter Ethernet to Coax Actiontec MoCA 2.0 *FREE SHIPPING* | eBay​Comparison retail prices, here.


As I understand it if your system are using only Bolts the MoCA 2 works great, add one or more Mini(s) to your system and the MoCA goes back to MoCA 1.1. How many people have more than one Bolt and no Mini(s) ?


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

lessd said:


> As I understand it if your system are using only Bolts the MoCA 2 works great, add one or more Mini(s) to your system and the MoCA goes back to MoCA 1.1. How many people have more than one Bolt and no Mini(s) ?


In my actual testing some time ago, I found that contrary to predictions, simply adding a MoCA 1.1 device did not reduce the entire MoCA network to MoCA 1.1 speeds. I did find that one device, the WCB3000N did reduce the entire network speed but with this exception, the MoCA transfer speed of the entire MoCA network will not all be reduced. If the data is traveling between 2 MoCA 2.0 devices it will be at the MoCA 2.0 rates. When data is going between 2 different rated MoCA devices, of course, it will be at the lowest MoCA rate.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

^^^What fcfc2 said^^^

... and also that fcfc2's test results map to the MoCA specs (aside from the WCB3000N); and that the extended/bonded MoCA 2.0 ECB6200 is overkill if employed only to provide connectivity for a BOLT/Mini setup, since the BOLT only supports standard MoCA 2.0. But if the price is right...


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

The Yitong folks at Amazon have an upgraded version of their 4 port adapter. This one has gigabit ports instead of fast ethernet. 
Amazon.com: Yitong Technology MoCA 2.0 Ethernet to Coax Adapter 4 Port Gigabit Ethernet Switch (YTMC-51N4-M2): Home Audio & Theater


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

Does the Bolt have the bonded MoCa built in? Or just the regular 2.0?


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

Dan203 said:


> Does the Bolt have the bonded MoCa built in? Or just the regular 2.0?


Regular.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

fcfc2 said:


> The Yitong folks at Amazon have an upgraded version of their 4 port adapter. This one has gigabit ports instead of fast ethernet.
> Amazon.com: Yitong Technology MoCA 2.0 Ethernet to Coax Adapter 4 Port Gigabit Ethernet Switch (YTMC-51N4-M2): Home Audio & Theater


THANKS for this heads-up. It was mind-boggling that their earlier version only had FastE ports.

Bonus, it has an RF pass-through port...










Dan203 said:


> Does the Bolt have the bonded MoCa built in? Or just the regular 2.0?


Yep, both BOLT models are regular/standard MoCA 2.0 (<400 Mbps data rate), same as this device.

edit: Updated MoCA 2.0 data rate limits


----------



## Dan203 (Apr 17, 2000)

That's a cool little device. I might pick one up to replace a current setup I have which uses a Moca adapter connected to a regular switch. One less plug and one less wire.


----------



## BrettStah (Nov 12, 2000)

Wouldn't I need two of these - one near the router and one in the "other room" where I would need/want Ethernet ports?


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

BrettStah said:


> Wouldn't I need two of these - one near the router and one in the "other room" where I would need/want Ethernet ports?


There always needs to be at least 2 MoCA devices to create a MoCA network, but there are gateways, routers, and devices like the Tivos which can be used. One of the MoCA devices must have a network/internet connection.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

BrettStah said:


> Wouldn't I need two of these - one near the router and one in the "other room" where I would need/want Ethernet ports?


^^^What fcfc2 said^^^. You'd need another MoCA device to establish the MoCA network; this Yitong 4-port MoCA adapter would be used in a remote location.

It's understandable where the confusion might come from, reading the description on the Amazon page -- though they do provide a caveat after the initial description. But even the disclaimer is a bit misleading, since the main bridging MoCA adapter wouldn't need to be one of these multi-port adapters.

_*The MoCA Network Adapter is a high-speed bridge that takes your coaxial network and, in conjunction with a router, delivers Ethernet networking access anywhere you have a coaxial port. *Most of the leading broadband companies rely on coaxial networks in the home (network over a cable connection) because it is very fast and extremely reliable. Yitong Technology's YTMC-51N4-M2 MoCA 2.0 adapter uses the latest technology to provide you with flawless performance for your most demanding connected devices at an aggressive price point.

Note: Most users will need two adapters. _​
They really need to offer this as a kit, with one of these 4-port MoCA adapters paired with one of their N1 adapters.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

This is peculiar...

Amazon.com: Yitong Technology MoCA 2.0 Ethernet to Coax Adapter TIVO (YTMC-51N1-M2): Computers & Accessories

*Item Under Review*
This item is currently unavailable because customers have told us there may be something wrong with our inventory of the item, the way we are shipping it, or the way it's described here. (Thanks for the tip!)

We're working to fix the problem as quickly as possible.​


----------



## osu1991 (Mar 6, 2015)

krkaufman said:


> This is peculiar...
> 
> Amazon.com: Yitong Technology MoCA 2.0 Ethernet to Coax Adapter TIVO (YTMC-51N1-M2): Computers & Accessories
> 
> ...


Hmm. I just got a second one from Amazon last week to replace the old ones I put at my sisters house.

It's working perfectly. I have it in my office with a mini and my slingbox using it through a gigabit switch.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

osu1991 said:


> Hmm. I just got a second one from Amazon last week to replace the old ones I put at my sisters house.
> 
> It's working perfectly. I have it in my office with a mini and my slingbox using it through a gigabit switch.


Who knows, maybe somebody is just complaining about "TIVO" being in the product name. Like maybe TiVo, Inc.

(Whether relevant or not, the 2-pack is NOT "under review," and it's product title doesn't include the "TIVO" bit.)

edit: p.s. The solo Yitong adapter is back as of 4/11.


----------



## UCLABB (May 29, 2012)

krkaufman said:


> Who knows, maybe somebody is just complaining about "TIVO" being in the product name. Like maybe TiVo, Inc.
> 
> (Whether relevant or not, the 2-pack is NOT "under review," and it's product title doesn't include the "TIVO" bit.)


Good piece of detective work!


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

UCLABB said:


> Good piece of detective work!


He-he!

p.s. I'd expand the suspect pool to Actiontec, Inc., since the "TIVO" tag might give the Yitong adapters an additional marketing edge over the Actiontec models.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

FYI... How to Upgrade Actiontec ECB6200 Firmware


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

FYI... The Camel has alerted me to a price drop on the Yitong MoCA 2.0 adapters...

(1x) Yitong YTMC-51N1-M2 $50
(2x) Yitong YTMC-51N1-M2 $100
(1x) Yitong YTMC-51N4-M2 [4 GigE ports] $60​


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

krkaufman said:


> (1x) Yitong YTMC-51N4-M2 [4 GigE ports] $60


I felt compelled to mention that a TCFer is struggling to get the 4-port Yitong adapters working in their environment. See here. YMMV.


----------



## sakaike (Jan 22, 2002)

krkaufman said:


> I felt compelled to mention that a TCFer is struggling to get the 4-port Yitong adapters working in their environment. See here. YMMV.


I'm that guy. Since this is a thread on available Moca adapters, I thought I would post that the support person from Yitong I have been working with (based in Las Vegas) said that the reason you can't buy their products anymore from Amazon is because they have decided to rebrand their products to better exploit western markets. So I would expect their adapters to return at some point, albeit with a new brand and hopefully better internals - at least based on my experience.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

Interesting. I'd noticed that the 4-port model was "Currently unavailable" before making my last post, but refrained from speculating as to the cause. Thanks for the info.

Hopefully they'll take your feedback/scenario into consideration before re-releasing.


----------



## wahoone (Mar 24, 2017)

krkaufman said:


> Interesting. I'd noticed that the 4-port model was "Currently unavailable" before making my last post, but refrained from speculating as to the cause. Thanks for the info.
> 
> Hopefully they'll take your feedback/scenario into consideration before re-releasing.


I was holding off buying one until I move in a few months. It was depending what kind of setup up wherever I move to, if one will be needed. Currently using 2 Actiontecs with Netgear switches.

krkaufman, thanks for all the information you disburse. Back in January I bought a Roamio OTA and Mini and indoor antenna. Receiving Omaha stations over 45 miles a here in Lincoln and of course the Lincoln ones.

Setting up Moca, which I never heard of before, I had a few missteps. Got the Tivo stuff all going but I accidentally downed my TWC whole home DVR by not knowing what I was doing. Information on this site provided me with the knowledge to correct that. Didn't realize TWC whole home DVR used Moca. Had the STB output of the Actiontec adapter going to the TWC DVR box.

After the wife finished watching all here shows, we got rid off our TWC tv package. Paying only for internet and PS Vue, had to sacrifice some channels. The box fees alone were ridiculous plus the surcharges.


----------



## sakaike (Jan 22, 2002)

krkaufman said:


> Interesting. I'd noticed that the 4-port model was "Currently unavailable" before making my last post, but refrained from speculating as to the cause. Thanks for the info.
> 
> Hopefully they'll take your feedback/scenario into consideration before re-releasing.


 Indeed, I'm hoping they do indeed consider the info from the original thread as well as some other threads specific to the IGMP snooping and green switches I included in sending them.

He also mentioned that their new adapters will be bonded 2.0 units and wanted to know whether I would be interested in testing a couple of units when they become available. Obviously, I told him, hell yea!


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

sakaike said:


> Indeed, I'm hoping they do indeed consider the info from the original thread as well as some other threads specific to the IGMP snooping and green switches I included in sending them.
> 
> He also mentioned that their new adapters will be bonded 2.0 units and wanted to know whether I would be interested in testing a couple of units when they become available. Obviously, I told him, hell yea!


Dang! Send him my email address, if they want any other testers...!! (Glad to hear you may get some benefit from your previous suffering.)


----------



## randian (Jan 15, 2014)

What's the consensus on MoCA adapters? Are the Actiontecs still good? Anything newer and better out there? I wanted the 4-port Yitong but since that's OOS and its replacement is nowhere in sight I was thinking of attaching a dumb Monoprice switch to an Actiontec 6200.


----------



## b_scott (Nov 27, 2006)

Actiontecs work great.

However, I'm tired of all the cables and switches. In the new house we're moving to, I'm just getting a Netgear Orbi system and calling it a day.


----------



## sakaike (Jan 22, 2002)

sakaike said:


> He also mentioned that their new adapters will be bonded 2.0 units and wanted to know whether I would be interested in testing a couple of units when they become available. Obviously, I told him, hell yea!


Update: I have been testing updated units from these guys for the last few months. It turns out that while the hardware was solid, they had some issues with the firmware where TiVo to Tivo communications were not happening. Those issues have now been resolved.

In addition, as discussed above, they have indeed rebranded themselves as "Kiwee Broadband" and they are now selling bonded Moca 2.0 adapters on Amazon. See here: https://smile.amazon.com/Kiwee-Broa...id=1505404589&sr=8-1&keywords=kiwee+broadband.

They do intend to bring their 4 GB port units back to market (Moca 2.0), and they are also currently designing a Moca adapter with built-in 802.11ac wifi (which is a combination not useful to me, but might be to others). I have agreed to beta test this new unit when it becomes available.

Like many of you, my ideal product is the 4-port adapter, and the two units I have tested for them are working great in my home set-up. It has allowed me to replace two Actiontec adapters and two Netgear switches with two of these combo units. Highly recommended if your use case is similar to mine.


----------



## randian (Jan 15, 2014)

sakaike said:


> In addition, as discussed above, they have indeed rebranded themselves as "Kiwee Broadband" and they are now selling bonded Moca 2.0 adapters on Amazon. See here: https://smile.amazon.com/Kiwee-Broa...id=1505404589&sr=8-1&keywords=kiwee+broadband.
> 
> They do intend to bring their 4 GB port units back to market (Moca 2.0), and they are also currently designing a Moca adapter with built-in 802.11ac wifi (which is a combination not useful to me, but might be to others). I have agreed to beta test this new unit when it becomes available.


Awesome news! Thanks for keeping us updated.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

Thanks for the effort and followup, @sakaike. I've added the linked Kiwee Broadband adapter to my MoCA adapters list, here, and added a reference to the list in the OP to this thread.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

FYI... Amazon has the TiVo Bridge (rebranded Actiontec ECB6000) on sale for $50

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01D94EUBS/

This is the lowest price to date, per camelcamelcamel.


----------



## Maast (Nov 5, 2017)

I've got 5 of the ECB6200s running as the backbone of my home network, each one is connected to netgear gigabit switches and then out to various devices: Central Tivo, mini's, computers, a server, etc.
Transferring computer-to-computer from one of the house to the other I'm getting ~96MB/sec - which is pretty close to full-up gigabit ethernet speeds. 
I discovered after a whole lot of playing around with it that I got the best speeds on the network when I only had the ECB6200s connected to the coax doing Moca, attaching a mini or the Tivo to the moca directly would drop the speeds, sometimes dramatically.
I've also found out recently after removing my last Win7 box that the Win7 was slowing down my Win box-to-Win box transfers.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

krkaufman said:


> FYI... Amazon has the *TiVo Bridge (rebranded Actiontec ECB6000)* on sale for $50
> 
> https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01D94EUBS/
> 
> This is the lowest price to date, per camelcamelcamel.


... and *NOW on sale for $40*. (link)

edit: p.s. $41 from Amazon


----------



## mike-d (Dec 12, 2013)

I finally figured out how to get to the configuration screen on my ECB6000 TIVO Bridge (I can explain if anyone is interested). Is there any newer firmware available? My version is listed as 2.1.


----------



## gary.buhrmaster (Nov 5, 2015)

mike-d said:


> Is there any newer firmware available?


Actiontec has not released any newer firmware publicly. It is likely that there are minor updates as the BOM change due to component updates (which would not impact existing units), so be careful about comparing firmware versions without also comparing hw versions and/or manufacturing dates.


----------



## mike-d (Dec 12, 2013)

Is there a way to tell if the TiVo is utilizing MOCA 1.1 or 2.0? I have a ECB6000 (MOCA 2.0) bridge and see an item on my BOLT in the network/MOCA diagnostics screen that says Network version (1.1). Does that mean MOCA 1.1? Anyone know? Thx


----------

