# Directv2PC and VPN



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

If I set up my router so I can access it remotely, will DirecTv2PC work on my DVRS at home? If I take my laptop and an H23, is it possible to use the H23 through my laptop to my VPN to do MRV from another location (on vacation) to act as a "sling" type device?
If so I defenitley need to start playing with VPN settings on my router...


----------



## jwd45244 (Aug 18, 2006)

dodge boy said:


> If I set up my router so I can access it remotely, will DirecTv2PC work on my DVRS at home? If I take my laptop and an H23, is it possible to use the H23 through my laptop to my VPN to do MRV from another location (on vacation) to act as a "sling" type device?
> If so I defenitley need to start playing with VPN settings on my router...


Try it and find out and let us know.


----------



## Grentz (Jan 10, 2007)

It should, as long as the VPN is setup correctly.

Issue will be bandwidth. Unlike sling/hava/etc. the Directv2PC app does not compress the data stream to work nicely over the internet (in fact it does not even work nicely on some slower home networks which are still much faster than most internet connections).


----------



## xzi (Sep 18, 2007)

I doubt it will work. A VPN requires two seperate networks that it routes between. It is very easy for software to not route outside of its own network--VPN or not--especially if it uses multicast and unicast, traffic that will never cross a router.

You would need quite a bit of money to get a converged network that is in the same subnet across sites.


----------



## Spanky_Partain (Dec 7, 2006)

Get a sling. That is what it is made to do and they work very well.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Spanky_Partain said:


> Get a sling. That is what it is made to do and they work very well.


I was just curious.


----------



## Getteau (Dec 20, 2007)

xzi said:


> I doubt it will work. A VPN requires two seperate networks that it routes between. It is very easy for software to not route outside of its own network--VPN or not--especially if it uses multicast and unicast, traffic that will never cross a router.
> 
> You would need quite a bit of money to get a converged network that is in the same subnet across sites.


I agree with XZI. From what I remember, the DTV app finds the DVR's through broadcasts, so it shouldn't won't work over VPN.


----------



## Drew2k (Aug 16, 2006)

Getteau said:


> I agree with XZI. From what I remember, the DTV app finds the DVR's through broadcasts, so it shouldn't won't work over VPN.


I wonder if it would be possible to use a VPN to open a remote connection to a PC within the home network, and then run DIRECTV2PC from that remote controlled PC ... it would see the receivers on the local network.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Drew2k said:


> I wonder if it would be possible to use a VPN to open a remote connection to a PC within the home network, and then run DIRECTV2PC from that remote controlled PC ... it would see the receivers on the local network.


I'm guessing that the screen scraping applications (VNC, GoToMyPC, Remote Desktop) won't be able to get ahold of the video image with the recent content protection provisions implemented in DIRECTV2PC.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

dodge boy said:


> I was just curious.


 You got 20+ Mb/s upstream?


----------



## Stuart Sweet (Jun 19, 2006)

I'm told that it should not work. In addition to the high bandwidth requirements, there are other checks in place to ensure that the DVR is in the same physical location as the PC. 

I'm not saying it's impossible for some of you gurus who play around with VPNs and NATs, but do keep in mind that if it does work for you... and if you do post the details here... you'll be setting our friends at DIRECTV on a mission to make sure it doesn't work in the future. 

It's not their fault, it's about the retransmission agreements, copyright and copy protection schemes, etc. are in place.


----------



## mlb (Jul 31, 2008)

You would have to encapsulate the broadcasts over the VPN... I'd also like to see D* try to make changes to stop it. There is no way without making it so complicated that people will not be able to use DirecTV2PC at all.


----------



## Spanky_Partain (Dec 7, 2006)

The remote stuff, like logmein.com, and remote desktop, etc. usually has a very generic video type driver. It does very well for basic colors but it probably will not work well on this type of applicateion.

But it would not cost anything to try, logmein.com is free too!


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Spanky_Partain said:


> The remote stuff, like logmein.com, and remote desktop, etc. usually has a very generic video type driver. It does very well for basic colors but it probably will not work well on this type of applicateion.
> 
> But it would not cost anything to try, logmein.com is free too!


The free logmein video is terribly slow and audio is not available, you need the paid for one.


----------



## dodge boy (Mar 31, 2006)

Stuart Sweet said:


> I'm told that it should not work. In addition to the high bandwidth requirements, there are other checks in place to ensure that the DVR is in the same physical location as the PC.
> 
> I'm not saying it's impossible for some of you gurus who play around with VPNs and NATs, but do keep in mind that if it does work for you... and if you do post the details here... you'll be setting our friends at DIRECTV on a mission to make sure it doesn't work in the future.
> 
> It's not their fault, it's about the retransmission agreements, copyright and copy protection schemes, etc. are in place.


I was only curious because af the dishnetwork and their "sling" receiver...


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

mlb said:


> You would have to encapsulate the broadcasts over the VPN... I'd also like to see D* try to make changes to stop it. There is no way without making it so complicated that people will not be able to use DirecTV2PC at all.


I'm betting that ping results could be pretty definitive in terms of figuring out how close two devices are. Live video isn't something that VPN hardware can accelerate.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

dodge boy said:


> I was only curious because af the dishnetwork and their "sling" receiver...


This is a completely different question. The SlingBox or SlingLoaded DVR features a relatively powerful encoder that can scale and compress on-the-fly. The DIRECTV HR2x doesn't have these capabilities.

Fortunately there are a few outboard options for encoders including the SlingBox.


----------



## zuf (May 25, 2007)

Grentz said:


> It should, as long as the VPN is setup correctly.
> 
> Issue will be bandwidth. Unlike sling/hava/etc. the Directv2PC app does not compress the data stream to work nicely over the internet (in fact it does not even work nicely on some slower home networks which are still much faster than most internet connections).


I'll second Grentz's comments about bandwidth: even if you could get the VPN, etc. working, I think the bandwidth going across the Internet would make it unusable. I use an older 802.11B (11Mbps) wireless setup in my home and have had problems with that giving me enough bandwidth for DIRECTV2PC. It does reasonably well for standard definition programming, but when I downloaded The Bucket List 1080p test movie to my R22, the 802.11B couldn't keep up and the playback with DIRECTV2PC was very jumpy and completely unwatchable (though it was fine when I connected a 100Mbps CAT5 cable).

Since you're mentioning an HR receiver, I expect you would end up with results similar to my experiment of playing The Bucket List over my WiFi connection.


----------



## VARTV (Dec 14, 2006)

Grentz said:


> Issue will be bandwidth. Unlike sling/hava/etc. the Directv2PC app does not compress the data stream to work nicely over the internet (in fact it does not even work nicely on some slower home networks which are still much faster than most internet connections).


Very true! I have this issue...


----------



## djrobx (Jan 27, 2009)

harsh said:


> I'm betting that ping results could be pretty definitive in terms of figuring out how close two devices are. Live video isn't something that VPN hardware can accelerate.


They could try to limit hosts by ping time, but that would potentially be causing headaches for people who use wireless or powerline/HPNA/MoCA networks, and not actually work for users hardwired on fiber (which would be the only real way to do it well anyhow).

Transfer some files on your wifi network at full speed and watch your pings go up. Pinging my U-verse receiver on HPNA coax had pings of 10-40ms without any load at all.

-- Rob


----------



## Colby (Dec 8, 2008)

Not having really played with the DirecTV2PC Client before, whatever protocol it uses to discover the server-side piece, it probably broadcasts it over the sub net, and waits for a response back. If that's the case, once you introduce a Site-to-Site VPN then wouldn't you have another subnet (i.e. home1 = 192.168.1.x & home2 = 192.168.2.x)?


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

harsh said:


> Live video isn't something that VPN hardware can accelerate.


That's a certainty....use VPN daily, and it isn't designed to accelerate video in any way.


----------



## Colby (Dec 8, 2008)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> That's a certainty....use VPN daily, and it isn't designed to accelerate video in any way.


Maybe with the help of something like a Riverbed piece of hardware (but who's going to have that kind of h/w installed at home, or even a big enough pipe to utilized it?). I don't know if you could accelerate something like DirecTVPC traffic because it's encrypted traffic, and so it doesn't know what it's trying to cache.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

VPN accelerators depend mostly on file caching to bring benefit. This isn't going to work for streaming data.


As for your subnet question, VPN places you on the same subnet so that's not a problem. The problem is latency and the volume of data as it is uncompressed.


----------



## codewiz (May 23, 2007)

I think some people are very dismissive without any evidence.

Using something like OpenVPN, the HRxx will have no idea that a machine isn't on the network and all the broadcasts will work fine with the VPN.

It becomes a question of bandwidth. I don't have a PC to test the directv2pc application. 

However many people now have very good pipes. My friend has 15Mbit up AND down. I would really be shocked if it didn't work over that type of speed. I have nothing to back it up but I can say using 802.11b as an example of why it wouldn't work isn't valid. Wireless has more overhead. 

My friends 15Mbit upload speed is actual speed not theoretical speed. I would be shocked if that didn't work. Whether this is acceptable to Directv or not, my buddy and I are going to try getting MRV on our HRxx receivers working over a VPN bridge between our networks. While he wouldn't be able to view my contect as my upload is way to slow, it will be interesting to see if it works with his receiver.

The real snag will be if they limit to MRV to receivers under the same account. If we both can get the update tonight, we will be testing over the next few weeks.


----------

