# TiVo Bolt MoCA setup, newbie....



## jago94 (Jun 22, 2016)

Hey guys, sorry, I am sort of a newbie when it comes to MoCA, and this is my very first TiVo.

I tried doing some searches on the forum but I was not able to find what I needed. I hope someone can help me out here.
I am trying to set up a MoCA network with an indoor OTA HD antenna and a Mini with Charter cable internet. My router is upstairs and my house is fully wired with Coaxial cable (built in 2001) by the home builder.
Here are the components that I have purchased to far, a 5-2050MHz splitter, 70bB POE filter, and a few Rj6 Coaxial cables. 
My Bolt is currently hooked up via ethernet to a Linksys MaxStream RE7000-AC1900 Wall Plug In Range Extender with MU-MIMO.

Where should I install the 70db POE filter exactly? I think I have to install it on the cable line coming into the house from the street in the box outside my garage.

Can I have my indoor OTA antenna plugged into the Bolt with the 5-2050MHz splitter with the other line plugged into the wall coaxial socket?

In my mind, I think I am missing something here, but I can't figure it out.

Thanks for any help you can provide.


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

moca with OTA and cable internet can be a little complicated.

The Bolt and Mini need to share a common coax source. In other words, the coax from the antenna has to go to a splitter, and then the splitter feeds the Bolt and the Mini. The POE filter goes on the input side of this splitter.

Feeding the OTA signal into the wall's cable feed is crossing the streams, and a hole is torn between time and space. 

===

Someone else might want to chime in on this idea, but you might be able to jerry rig this into working by using a diplexer at the wall's coax socket. 

From the antenna's splitter, feed the Bolt with one leg. The other leg feeds the diplexer (it looks a lot like a splitter). The HIGH/SAT output on the diplexer then goes to the coax socket on the wall. (This way, only the moca signal would be sent into the rest of the home's coax.)

If you try this idea, you'd also need a second POE filter on the input side of the Charter input coming into the house, and ideally a coax terminator on the unused output of the diplexer.


----------



## jago94 (Jun 22, 2016)

BigJimOutlaw said:


> Feeding the OTA signal into the wall's cable feed is crossing the streams, and a hole is torn between time and space.


oh God, I was afraid of that! I hate slime!! haha



BigJimOutlaw said:


> moca with OTA and cable internet can be a little complicated.
> 
> The Bolt and Mini need to share a common coax source. In other words, the coax from the antenna has to go to a splitter, and then the splitter feeds the Bolt and the Mini. The POE filter goes on the input side of this splitter.


So, should I hook the OTA to the cable box outside my house so that it feeds signal to the lines in my house right?

So then my setup will look like this

Cable line ->POE filter -> splitter ->one is OTA/ two is cable


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

I just updated my post with more information and a slightly unusual idea that might work.



> So, should I hook the OTA to the cable box outside my house so that it feeds signal to the lines in my house right?
> 
> So then my setup will look like this
> 
> Cable line ->POE filter -> splitter ->one is OTA/ two is cable


The problem is, you can't really have two different input sources (internet and OTA) over the same wire. The coax feed to the modem has to be isolated and separate from the OTA and moca feed. But, the idea in my updated post might work.


----------



## jago94 (Jun 22, 2016)

Thanks for your thoughts on this. It might be a little more than I want to end up doing at this point.


----------



## fyodor (Sep 19, 2006)

Where is the Mini physically? Can it be plugged into your router via Ethernet? The wireless AC data connection between the Bolt and Mini would probably be good enough.

I would think that you want your antenna plugging only into the Bolt and then have the coax distributed through the house since the antenna signal might screw with your cable modem.


----------



## fyodor (Sep 19, 2006)

Wouldn't the way to do it to do be this?

1.Antenna feeds into low-frequency portion (antenna) input of diplexer providing TV signal.
2. Wall coax feeds into the high frequency input (satellite) of the diplexer, providing MoCA data signal.

Combined output of diplexer feeds into Tivo?

Also, at least on the antenna side, wouldn't the diplexer prevent any MoCA signals from coming over the antenna, making a POE filter unnecessary?

That being said, if he already has a good wireless AC bridge between the Tivo and the router, I would see if he can't use that for his data connection, depending on where the Mini is.



BigJimOutlaw said:


> moca with OTA and cable internet can be a little complicated.
> 
> The Bolt and Mini need to share a common coax source. In other words, the coax from the antenna has to go to a splitter, and then the splitter feeds the Bolt and the Mini. The POE filter goes on the input side of this splitter.
> 
> ...


----------



## fcfc2 (Feb 19, 2015)

Here is an idea, the assumptions are that the coax wiring is homerun from the location in the gargage and there are not a bunch of additional splitters hidden in the walls, and the OP can figure out which runs from the garage feed which rooms. 
If these conditions are met, then I would first isolate the incoming internet line and feed it directly to the room with his cable modem and router via a single barrel connector. If wanting to use the remaining splitter for the MoCA network to all other locations, I would add a 75 Ohm terminator on the now open input and any remaining open ports. If only one other location where the mini is located is going to be used, the splitter can be removed and replaced by a barrel splitter between the coax from the mini's location to the coax in the room with the Bolt. In the location of the Bolt which needs to use the "create a MoCA network" setting, the antenna can be connected to the "antenna" leg of a satellite grade diplexer, and the input of the diplexer be connected to the input of the Bolt. The open "satellite" port of the diplexer then goes to the wall coax port in the room with the Bolt. 
No MoCA filters are needed in this plan as the coax from the ISP is isolated to the cable modem and no MoCA frequencies should be sent to the antenna because the diplexer will keep the MoCA frequencies on the Sat side of the diplexer.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

fyodor said:


> Wouldn't the way to do it to do be this?
> 
> 1.Antenna feeds into low-frequency portion (antenna) input of diplexer providing TV signal.
> 2. Wall coax feeds into the high frequency input (satellite) of the diplexer, providing MoCA data signal.
> ...


Yes, that would work for making both OTA and MoCA* available to the BOLT -- assuming the OTA coax line is available in the same room as the BOLT.



fyodor said:


> Also, at least on the antenna side, wouldn't the diplexer prevent any MoCA signals from coming over the antenna, making a POE filter unnecessary?


Yes, use of a diplexer in this way is an effective MoCA filter keeping the MoCA signals from traveling to the antenna.



fyodor said:


> That being said, if he already has a good wireless AC bridge between the Tivo and the router, I would see if he can't use that for his data connection, depending on where the Mini is.


* Which they would need to do if they don't want to have to buy a separate MoCA adapter to create their MoCA network. With the BOLT "pretending" to be connected via Ethernet, it could be used to create the MoCA network. Otherwise, it will be a judgement call on whether to make the BOLT a MoCA client (with a separate MoCA adapter being used to create the MoCA network) or to remain connected via the range extender. Simultaneous streaming of HD recordings to the Mini and streaming HD Amazon/Vudu videos to the BOLT should give the extender a workout, and help determine whether a wired MoCA connection for the BOLT is required.

edit: p.s. Assuming you opt for the above "MoCA ala fyodor" approach, relying on your home's cable-system connected coax lines to distribute your MoCA network, you _would _need to install a *MoCA PoE filter* to secure and strengthen your MoCA signals inside the home (and away from your cable provider's network): either inside that cable box outside or on the input to the highest-level splitter from which any of your MoCA-enabled coax lines emanate.

Add'l notes/caveats re: this setup:

Splitters need to be MoCA-friendly (2GHz spec should be good), and you'll want to review specs on any splitters interconnecting the home's coax lines.
MoCA on the same coax lines as the cable modem means you'll want to review your cable modem's MoCA compatibility. (Can be addressed if the cable modem freaks out when you enable MoCA on the Mini.)
The "raw" OTA antenna signal is only available to the BOLT, so OTA programming can only be accessed via the BOLT or a network-connected Mini via the BOLT. (i.e. Any TVs connected to the home's coax wiring won't be able to tune OTA channels on their own.)


----------



## BigJimOutlaw (Mar 21, 2004)

fyodor said:


> Wouldn't the way to do it to do be this?
> 
> 1.Antenna feeds into low-frequency portion (antenna) input of diplexer providing TV signal.
> 2. Wall coax feeds into the high frequency input (satellite) of the diplexer, providing MoCA data signal.
> ...


That would work... and it's cleaner. :up: I have a top-down cable mindset with moca and forget that diplexers can be bi-directionally flexible.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

jago94 said:


> In my mind, I think I am missing something here, but I can't figure it out.


The main thing I believe you *might* be missing is a separate MoCA adapter, Ethernet connected to your router, to provide a fully-wired MoCA network configuration for your BOLT and Mini.

Absent a standalone MoCA adapter to create your MoCA network, you will need to use the BOLT to create a wired MoCA network between the BOLT and the Mini, with the BOLT effectively having a wireless connection to the router and Internet. Beneficially, this would put the heavy lifting (HD MPEG2 Multi-Room Streaming from BOLT to Mini) on the MoCA network, but would route all Internet traffic for the BOLT and Mini through the range extender. Contrary to my earlier statement, the toughest test for this setup would likely be simultaneous streaming of HD Amazon/Vudu content by each device (though offloading high-bitrate content using KMTTG while streaming HD Amazon/Vudu content on the Mini might also be an interesting test).


----------



## jago94 (Jun 22, 2016)

wow, thanks for all the great suggestions guys. My Mini is located in the master bedroom upstairs and I am not sure how exactly the house coaxial is wired up, but I don't think anything out of the ordinary was done, but you know homebuilders....sometimes they get lazy. At my cable box outside, there are two lines that go into the outside wall, so maybe there are two different lines. At the moment, the current setup with the range extender and the mini plugged directly into the router is working, but its not that clean, I have a long 50' Cat 5 cable from the router into the mini, and I have to reset the mini every time I want to watch live TV or recorded shows (can't locate the Bolt), but the streaming content works just fine. I was thinking that a MoCA network might fix that connection issue and also be cleaner looking, since the wife is not happy with visible cables hanging out.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

BigJimOutlaw said:


> .......The problem is, you can't really have two different input sources (internet and OTA) over the same wire. ........


Actually you can, if the proper traps were put on his cable feed allowing internet only. OTA and cable signals share the same frequencies and the DOCSIS Internet frequencies are outside of this band. That's how Internet and cable tv signals don't interfere on the same cable from the cable co. If the traps are in place blocking his cable tv signals, then if he injects the OTA signal on the line it will be free and clear of any cable tv signals that may interfere and the Internet signal will still be in its proper place outside the tv band.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

jago94 said:


> ... I have a long 50' Cat 5 cable from the router into the mini, and I have to reset the mini every time I want to watch live TV or recorded shows (can't locate the Bolt),


YMMV, but you may want to review this poster's issue and resolution, to see if it helps with your particular situation. (Though I'd still recommend going all MoCA, since your house is fully wired with coax -- and you could then use the MoCA network as a backbone to improve your wireless connectivity.)

See: http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=10917666#post10917666 (also this)

#IGMPsnooping


----------



## jago94 (Jun 22, 2016)

krkaufman said:


> YMMV, but you may want to review this poster's issue and resolution, to see if it helps with your particular situation. (Though I'd still recommend going all MoCA, since your house is fully wired with coax -- and you could then use the MoCA network as a backbone to improve your wireless connectivity.)
> 
> See: http://tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?p=10917666#post10917666 (also this)
> 
> #IGMPsnooping


Thanks for the suggestion, I currently have IGMP snooping turned on (by default), so I will disable it and see if that changes anything. :up::up::up:

"IGMP Snooping - IGMP snooping is designed to prevent hosts on a local network from receiving traffic for a multicast group they have not explicitly joined. IGMP snooping is especially useful for bandwidth-intensive IP multicast applications such as IPTV."


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

jago94 said:


> Thanks for the suggestion, I currently have IGMP snooping turned on (by default), so I will disable it and see if that changes anything.


On the possible bright side, disabling IGMP snooping seems to have been the ticket for most all the other posts I've come across. (e.g. check thread beginning *here*)

p.s. And I'd still recommend going full MoCA, budget allowing.


----------



## snerd (Jun 6, 2008)

HarperVision said:


> Actually you can, if the proper traps were put on his cable feed allowing internet only. OTA and cable signals share the same frequencies and the DOCSIS Internet frequencies are outside of this band. That's how Internet and cable tv signals don't interfere on the same cable from the cable co. If the traps are in place blocking his cable tv signals, then if he injects the OTA signal on the line it will be free and clear of any cable tv signals that may interfere and the Internet signal will still be in its proper place outside the tv band.


Yes and no.

It is true that it is possible to mix *some* OTA channels and *some* cable channels on the same coax. You know this, since you've done it.

However, DOCSIS frequencies *do* overlap (completely) with OTA/catv frequencies, they are *not* in a separate band. In fact, DOCSIS 3.0 downstream data uses the same 6MHz channels that catv uses. The frequency spectrum from 54MHz to 1002MHz is divided into 158 "chunks" of 6MHz each. The old analog cable system used one 6MHz chunk for each channel, but digital TV packs a couple of HD channels into a single 6MHz chunk, or a bunch of SD channels into a single 6MHz chunk. This Wikipedia entry includes a description of the 158 channels. My DOCSIS modem is currently using channels 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 87 and 88 at frequencies ranging from 555MHz to 609MHz.

Bottom line: the cable company sets aside some 6MHz channels for DOCSIS signals and uses the others for TV signals. There is no conflict on the coax, since they decide which channels to allocate for each type of signal. So, anyone who wants to mix OTA and catv on the same coax should be careful not to stomp on any DOCSIS signals in the process.

Unless you really know what you're doing, you shouldn't even think about mixing OTA and catv. For those who really need both, I'd suggest dedicating one TiVo to OTA and another to cable rather than jumping through a bunch of hoops to get a single TiVo to support both without any clashes that would upset the FCC and/or your cable provider.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

snerd said:


> Yes and no. It is true that it is possible to mix some OTA channels and some cable channels on the same coax. You know this, since you've done it. However, DOCSIS frequencies do overlap (completely) with OTA/catv frequencies, they are not in a separate band. In fact, DOCSIS 3.0 downstream data uses the same 6MHz channels that catv uses. The frequency spectrum from 54MHz to 1002MHz is divided into 158 "chunks" of 6MHz each. The old analog cable system used one 6MHz chunk for each channel, but digital TV packs a couple of HD channels into a single 6MHz chunk, or a bunch of SD channels into a single 6MHz chunk. This Wikipedia entry includes a description of the 158 channels. My DOCSIS modem is currently using channels 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 87 and 88 at frequencies ranging from 555MHz to 609MHz. Bottom line: the cable company sets aside some 6MHz channels for DOCSIS signals and uses the others for TV signals. There is no conflict on the coax, since they decide which channels to allocate for each type of signal. So, anyone who wants to mix OTA and catv on the same coax should be careful not to stomp on any DOCSIS signals in the process. Unless you really know what you're doing, you shouldn't even think about mixing OTA and catv. For those who really need both, I'd suggest dedicating one TiVo to OTA and another to cable rather than jumping through a bunch of hoops to get a single TiVo to support both without any clashes that would upset the FCC and/or your cable provider.


Cool, thanks for adding these additional details. So I guess when they filter out cable tv from DOCSIS they use notch filters for the frequencies in use then. I believe systems that did away with analog channels use the frequency bands where those were located though, right?


----------



## snerd (Jun 6, 2008)

HarperVision said:


> Cool, thanks for adding these additional details. So I guess when they filter out cable tv from DOCSIS they use notch filters for the frequencies in use then. I believe systems that did away with analog channels use the frequency bands where those were located though, right?


I think my answer depends on who you mean when you say "they filter out....". I don't think any notch filters are required.

TV tuning won't know/care about the DOCSIS signals, because the CableCard will ignore channels that aren't provisioned. The DOCSIS modem won't know/care about the catv signals, since it will only looks at the 4 or 8 or 16 or 32 channels that the modem is configured to use for data. The cable can be thought of as a 158 lane highway where the cable company can use the lanes to carry whatever traffic they choose to send out. They could mix analog TV, digital TV and DOCSIS signals in whatever combination they want on those 158 lanes, provided that each lane consistently carries the same type of signal.

I get cable TV and internet both from Comcast, so I'm not absolutely certain how they handle installations that are "internet only." I'm guessing that they simply leave the catv signals on the cable, since you would need a CableCard to receive/decode them, and they have complete control in terms of provisioning the CableCard, so they don't really need to worry about theft of service like they did with analog. That way, if a customer decides to add TV and wants to do a self-install, they can just get the CableCards and/or set-top boxes they need and the cable company won't have to roll a truck to add TV support.

I used to have only TV from Comcast, and added internet last year at the same time that I added a Roamio Plus and the Mini, along with a MoCA adapter for my old 2-tuner Premiere. When I went to the local Xfinity store to get a cable card, I asked about internet and they offered me a good deal on the Double Play that ended up cutting my overall cost significantly. I took home the new CableCard and modem and did a self-install. It turned out that they had to do a truck roll anyway to remove a filter on the utility pole that was blocking my internet access, but if it hadn't been for that filter, all of the signals would have already been present on the cable in my house. Based on that, I'm fairly confident that most "internet only" installs are likely to have catv signals on the cable as well as the DOCSIS signals. The Comcast tech seemed surprised to find that filter -- it was probably installed 25 years ago before Comcast owned the cable in my area.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

snerd said:


> I think my answer depends on who you mean when you say "they filter out....". I don't think any notch filters are required. TV tuning won't know/care about the DOCSIS signals, because the CableCard will ignore channels that aren't provisioned. The DOCSIS modem won't know/care about the catv signals, since it will only looks at the 4 or 8 or 16 or 32 channels that the modem is configured to use for data. The cable can be thought of as a 158 lane highway where the cable company can use the lanes to carry whatever traffic they choose to send out. They could mix analog TV, digital TV and DOCSIS signals in whatever combination they want on those 158 lanes, provided that each lane consistently carries the same type of signal. I get cable TV and internet both from Comcast, so I'm not absolutely certain how they handle installations that are "internet only." I'm guessing that they simply leave the catv signals on the cable, since you would need a CableCard to receive/decode them, and they have complete control in terms of provisioning the CableCard, so they don't really need to worry about theft of service like they did with analog. That way, if a customer decides to add TV and wants to do a self-install, they can just get the CableCards and/or set-top boxes they need and the cable company won't have to roll a truck to add TV support. I used to have only TV from Comcast, and added internet last year at the same time that I added a Roamio Plus and the Mini, along with a MoCA adapter for my old 2-tuner Premiere. When I went to the local Xfinity store to get a cable card, I asked about internet and they offered me a good deal on the Double Play that ended up cutting my overall cost significantly. I took home the new CableCard and modem and did a self-install. It turned out that they had to do a truck roll anyway to remove a filter on the utility pole that was blocking my internet access, but if it hadn't been for that filter, all of the signals would have already been present on the cable in my house. Based on that, I'm fairly confident that most "internet only" installs are likely to have catv signals on the cable as well as the DOCSIS signals. The Comcast tech seemed surprised to find that filter -- it was probably installed 25 years ago before Comcast owned the cable in my area.


I understand that part. I have TWC (soon to be Charter) so when we have Internet only they place a filter on the line similar to what you mentioned, but they're not all encrypted so if they leave that filter off we would get free TV channels, both analog and some clear QAM digital. That's what I'm talking about with using notch filters since if it's how you're saying it is, with docsis interspersed with the QAM TV channels, then they'd have to notch out the tv channels around the Internet ones.


----------



## snerd (Jun 6, 2008)

HarperVision said:


> I understand that part. I have TWC (soon to be Charter) so when we have Internet only they place a filter on the line similar to what you mentioned, but they're not all encrypted so if they leave that filter off we would get free TV channels, both analog and some clear QAM digital. That's what I'm talking about with using notch filters since if it's how you're saying it is, with docsis interspersed with the QAM TV channels, then they'd have to notch out the tv channels around the Internet ones.


Interesting. I doubt that they actually intersperse DOCSIS and TV, but the DOCSIS spec does allow any of the 158 channels to carry DOCSIS data. The DOCSIS 3.0 specs require modems to support 4 or more downstream channels that fall within an arbitrary 60MHz window, which implies a window of 10 neighboring channels. DOCSIS 3.0 modems are also required to support at least the downstream frequency range of 108MHz to 300MHz (32 channels). Although support above 300MHz is optional, I'd think that modem manufactures would tend to support the full downstream range from 54MHz to 1002MHz so that more cable companies can use their modems. Once the cable company decides which channels to allocate to DOCSIS, they can only support modems that are compatible with those channels.

I suspect the cable companies set aside a (large?) block of channels that they use only for DOCSIS so that any "internet only" filters they use would pass all DOCSIS channels while blocking everything else. This would avoid the need to notch individual channels, since that isn't really practical. In addition, there is likely to be a "dead band" of unused channels between any DOCSIS and non-DOCSIS channels so that the edges of the filtering don't have to be too sharp, since filters with sharp edges are more expensive to manufacture. Seems to me there's an incentive to encrypt as much TV as possible in order to avoid the hassle and expense of the filters.


----------



## mdavej (Aug 13, 2015)

FWIW, Charter has no analog or clear QAM anymore. All channels are encrypted (but most are still copy freely). So what you have with TWC will eventually go away. For some reason they still have the filter you're talking about even though it accomplishes nothing anymore.

I read that Charter's intent is to upgrade all analog TWC markets to all digital soon after the merger. It took them 2 years to do that with their own system a while back.


----------



## HarperVision (May 14, 2007)

mdavej said:


> FWIW, Charter has no analog or clear QAM anymore. All channels are encrypted (but most are still copy freely). So what you have with TWC will eventually go away. *For some reason they still have the filter you're talking about even though it accomplishes nothing anymore. * I read that Charter's intent is to upgrade all analog TWC markets to all digital soon after the merger. It took them 2 years to do that with their own system a while back.


I still accomplishes a lot because we still have tons of analog stations here. Believe me, here in HI in some ways it's like going back 20-30 years and the locals want to keep it that way! I think they'll (New Charter) have a fight on their hands when they try to remove the analog channels!

The local protest groups have successfully shut down our high speed ferry from Hawaii Island to Maui and recently killed off (at least temporarily) the 30 Meter Telescope from Mauna Kea, so a lil' ole cable company is no match for these warrior people!


----------



## mdavej (Aug 13, 2015)

HarperVision said:


> I still accomplishes a lot because we still have tons of analog stations here. Believe me, here in HI in some ways it's like going back 20-30 years and the locals want to keep it that way! I think they'll (New Charter) have a fight on their hands when they try to remove the analog channels!
> 
> The local protest groups have successfully shut down our high speed ferry from Hawaii Island to Maui and recently killed off (at least temporarily) the 30 Meter Telescope from Mauna Kea, so a lil' ole cable company is no match for these warrior people!


They got quite a fight here on the mainland too. Made lots and lots of people unhappy when they turned off analog. But it only affected cable thieves, so they didn't have much of a leg to stand on when they protested. Charter happily gave all their actual subscribers a digital cable box for free for a couple of years at least. So even if there is a fierce battle on the islands, it's one they're certainly going to lose this time. Enjoy it while it lasts, which will still probably be quite a few years.


----------



## krkaufman (Nov 25, 2003)

jago94 said:


> Thanks for the suggestion, I currently have IGMP snooping turned on (by default), so I will disable it and see if that changes anything. :up::up::up:
> 
> "IGMP Snooping - IGMP snooping is designed to prevent hosts on a local network from receiving traffic for a multicast group they have not explicitly joined. IGMP snooping is especially useful for bandwidth-intensive IP multicast applications such as IPTV."


Any improvements... ?


----------



## jago94 (Jun 22, 2016)

krkaufman said:


> Any improvements... ?


Not really. I turned off IGMP for a while and my connection seemed to get worse, but I haven't had time to mess with anything yet. Hopefully I will have some time in the next few weeks to mess around with it some more. My "honey do" list has grown and I better take care of those things first! haha


----------

