# Will this Whole Home DVR configuration work?



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

I'm looking to upgrade to a Whole Home DVR configuration and the diagram here is what I believe I need to do. Are there any problems or errors in my configuration? This represents an upgraded environment from my current configuration which does not have SWM or DECA network now.

I do have a "before" diagram as well which I can post if needed.

Thanks!


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

eph3 said:


> I'm looking to upgrade to a Whole Home DVR configuration and the diagram here is what I believe I need to do. Are there any problems or errors in my configuration? This represents an upgraded environment from my current configuration which does not have SWM or DECA network now.
> 
> I do have a "before" diagram as well which I can post if needed.
> 
> Thanks!


:nono:
You can't use the HR24 to bridge from the DECA to ethernet, as when the ethernet connects, it disables the DECA.
You need to have a broadband DECA for this.


----------



## ejhuzy (Jun 19, 2006)

Does this install look right? I'm having trouble getting a picture now. This was done by DTV. Is the SWM PI hooked up right?


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

Ummm... Can you post a larger pic?

- Merg


----------



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> :nono:
> You can't use the HR24 to bridge from the DECA to ethernet, as when the ethernet connects, it disables the DECA.
> You need to have a broadband DECA for this.


Would that mean that I have to add the DECA connection to the HR24 like in this revised diagram?

I use Media Share and VOD so I need to bridge my home network with the SWM network. Just looking for the proper way to do this since I'm new to this type of configuration. Thanks!


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

No.

When using DECA for MRV, you do not hook up an external DECA to a H24/HR24 as they have an internal DECA. You need to use a green-label splitter off of SWM1. One output goes to the PI and then the HR24 (or the PI can be before the splitter, if you want). The other output goes to the DECA. From the DECA you would have the DECA PI and the ethernet cable to your router.

In your pic, it looks like the router is connected via an ethernet port on the HR24. If you are using DECA for MRV, the ethernet ports on the H24/HR24 are not active.

Also, while you do have the D12 off of your legacy port, you can also have it off of one of the SWM ports as it is SWM compatible.

- Merg


----------



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

Thanks very much Merg! A splitter was the missing component to have the configuration make sense. I believe this config addresses the errors in the prior version. This should work?


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

This looks better, but the DECA needs a PI for power, and the 2-way splitter needs to have the SWiM PI connected to the other port to pass DC [yeah it's easier to draw it this way].


----------



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

Thanks VOS! Hopefully this final tweak captures all of the feedback and corrections I've gotten from everyone...










BUT, I must admit that I'm concerned about the number and complexity of the additional DECA components required to make this work. I have an existing hardwired ethernet network run throughout my house which I used for MRV capability with ReplayTV DVRs in the past. I'm likely to upgrade my existing config to SWM8 and HR-24 but leverage my existing network after turning on the service with D*. The config is MUCH less complex...


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

Lose the upper SWiM PI, since you only need one.
I read & posted in your other thread, but "only see" two DECAs being added into your setup and they seem to be fairly bulletproof.

Maybe this just comes down to "the devil you know, verses one you don't". :lol:


----------



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

Thanks again VOS! We'll see how it goes ... I'm probably going to try my existing ethernet network first, but will switch to DECA if needed.


----------



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

I've removed the diagrams from this thread for configurations which had errors in them.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

eph3 said:


> Thanks again VOS! We'll see how it goes ... I'm probably going to try my existing ethernet network first, but will switch to DECA if needed.


Adding in DECAs really doesn't add to the complexity of your setup and in reality reduces the number of wires needed. As the DECA sits right behind the receiver, you really just use some small patch cables to connect the DECA to the receiver so it will appear that only one cable is going to each receiver.

You then just need one additional DECA to bridge to your home network.

- Merg


----------



## dwcolvin (Oct 4, 2007)

The question is, _why do you have to ask?_ 

Presumably, DirecTV has figured out how to do MRV/DECA installs by now, there's no way for you to do the upgrade yourself for less than DirecTV will charge to do it, and it's "guaranteed" to work.


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

dwcolvin said:


> ...and it's "guaranteed" to work.


Well.... 

- Merg


----------



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

Let's see how much this stirs things up ....

If you really break down all of additional components added with the DECA configuration, there are many additional potential points of failure. Getting REALLY anal about it, there are a dozen added elements: components, connections, etc. which is concerning to me. I had an issue with my initial install of the D* HD-DVR - I could not reliably record two HD programs simultaneously. After several calls to D* about the issue I traced the problem down to a bad coax connector on one of the cables coming from the dish.

To me, all things being equal (or close enough) simpler is better.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

eph3 said:


> Let's see how much this stirs things up ....
> 
> If you really break down all of additional components added with the DECA configuration, there are many additional potential points of failure. Getting REALLY anal about it, there are a dozen added elements: components, connections, etc. which is concerning to me.* I had an issue with my initial install *of the D* HD-DVR - I could not reliably record two HD programs simultaneously. After several calls to D* about the issue I traced the problem down to a bad coax connector on one of the cables coming from the dish.
> 
> To me, all things being equal (or close enough) simpler is better.


So did I with my HD upgrade which was the first time I let anyone else do any work.
Anybody can "blank" a wet dream, but this doesn't mean everyone will.

Do what you're comfortable with and be done with it, unless it doesn't work. :lol:


----------



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

The new SWM8, PI and HD-DVR (HR22) are in place and working fine. I submitted the request to D* to enable Whole Home DVR using the instructions in this forum (link below), and am waiting for them to turn the service on.

http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=177590


----------



## Kev4Bama (Aug 7, 2010)

I also sent an email about 2:00 Central today following the instructions on the first page as well but have yet to get a response



eph3 said:


> The new SWM8, PI and HD-DVR (HR22) are in place and working fine. I submitted the request to D* to enable Whole Home DVR using the instructions in this forum (link below), and am waiting for them to turn the service on.
> 
> http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?t=177590


----------



## Nacraman1 (Dec 31, 2010)

Kev4Bama,

What is the status on your email request for MRV from DTV? I'm interested on whether they turned it on and how long they took.

Thanks.


----------



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

Kev4Bama and I had a similar experience. D* enabled the Whole Home DVR service within 24 hours of the email request we submitted.

Speaking for myself, I've been using MRV quite a lot over the past several days and it has worked flawlessly. The only thing noticeable is a very slight delay for some actions from the remote DVR, e.g. skip forward/backward when playing back a recorded program.

Now I'm just hoping that D* will expand the capability to provide control over submitting recording requests to a specific DVR. This can be done when scheduling recordings via the D* website or iPhone app, but not from the DVR itself.


----------



## veryoldschool (Dec 10, 2006)

eph3 said:


> Now I'm just hoping that D* will expand the capability to provide control over submitting recording requests to a specific DVR. This can be done when scheduling recordings via the D* website or iPhone app, but not from the DVR itself.


Don't be holding your breath, but it can be done from a receiver [not DVR].


----------



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

veryoldschool said:


> Don't be holding your breath, but it can be done from a receiver [not DVR].


Yes, I know ... that makes it all the more puzzling since the logic/code already exists. Why not apply it to the DVR as well? Do you know of a reason why D* would not provide this capability?


----------



## The Merg (Jun 24, 2007)

eph3 said:


> Yes, I know ... that makes it all the more puzzling since the logic/code already exists. Why not apply it to the DVR as well? Do you know of a reason why D* would not provide this capability?


The biggest thought is that they are trying to avoid having users being prompted with too many prompts. If you are in front of a DVR and want something recorded, you just need to hit R). The thought of hitting R) and then needing to select which DVR kind of defeated the purpose of their one-touch record. Obviously, if you are in front of a receiver, you need to tell it which DVR to use.

- Merg


----------



## eph3 (Dec 23, 2007)

"One touch record" would still be one touch if the customer's environment has a single DVR. But for those of us who have gone to the trouble and expense of having multiple DVRs should have the flexibility of controlling more than one. I had this same functionality for years with the ReplayTV and after having WHD for less than a week I'm already experiencing withdrawals.


----------

