# DECA vers CAT5/6



## David Carmichael (Mar 12, 2007)

There are many messages in many different areas so trying to find an answer to my question is kind of hard so here it is sweet and short.

If you have a working CAT5/6 network is there really any advantage to move to DECA/COXAL setup other than to meet DirecTV's "Supported Hardware"??


--------------------------------------------------------------------------

One reason that I am looking at spending the $$$ is connected media players, game systems and computers to the current network, this would move the DirecTV equipment to its own "sub"-network... But these units have to have access to Interent through my home network for VOD downloads.

The one reason I have not already done this is I have a HR-20 currently connected and I keep reading connection troubles for receivers that are not already SWIM ready and do not want to loose the Over The Air HD programing from "CW" and "MyTV" networks which currently are only in "SD" From DirecTV in my market area.


----------



## jal (Mar 3, 2005)

I've got a CAT5 setup. Works flawlessly, so I've had no need to go to DECA. Because DECA converts at each end of the coax to ethernet anyway, I don't see the advangage, other than installation ease.


----------



## mobandit (Sep 4, 2007)

jal said:


> I've got a CAT5 setup. Works flawlessly, so I've had no need to go to DECA. Because DECA converts at each end of the coax to ethernet anyway, I don't see the advangage, other than installation ease.


It also moves the MRV traffic off of your home network...may not be a big deal, but if you want to free up the bandwidth on your home network then DECA is the only way to go.

By the way, HR20's are SWM compatible, and work just fine with DECA...just ask my HR20...it's connected via DECA and works just fine. It has been connected to SWM for a couple years now...


----------



## dminches (Oct 1, 2006)

I don't see any reason to change unless your current setup doesn't meet your needs. I have an Ethernet setup also and it works great. I am looking forward to whatever software enhancements DirecTV has planned to improve the usability of MRV. Managing lost playlists from multiple machines is a little tedious but I will take it. MRV changes how one uses the system in their home.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

As mobandit says the biggest thing, right now, is that it moves traffic off your home network freeing up bandwidth for browsing the Internet on your PC, etc.

However there may be future features that only work via DECA.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

If you have a router/setup that is already working with Ethernet, it's fine to keep that. The issue is that some routers just don't work right and can't be trusted to deliver packets effectively. Anyone that is going to spend money to get the networking setup should really use DIRECTV's equipment though as it has the advantage of being supported, less expensive (in "new everything" situations) and runs at the right data and throughput rates.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

RunnerFL said:


> As mobandit says the biggest thing, right now, is that it moves traffic off your home network freeing up bandwidth for browsing the Internet on your PC, etc.


This argument is bogus in the presence of switched Ethernet.

A functional Ethernet switch will isolate Internet and other computer oriented traffic from MRV traffic.

As Doug Brott points out, many routers do not qualify as functional Ethernet switches.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

*David*, since you are looking to make changes in your setup, I'd go ahead and get DECA and SWiM. It isn't that expensive and it will make your whole house DVR work flawlessly.

I'm hoping to hold out until fall of 2011. That's when my contract is up and I'd like to negotiate for as much free stuff as I can, including DECA and SWiM. But if for some reason I need to take my DirecTV equipment off my Ethernet setup before then, I will. For now, everything works well. If that was to change, or if I even suspected it would change, I'd make the upgrade in an instant.


----------



## lugnutathome (Apr 13, 2009)

Probably not if you have a working infrastructure in place. The DECA would add more stems and pieces to transmit the same traffic from the same Ethernet ports via the coax instead of your network (unless you have all *24 series receivers).

BUT SWM may give you a better signal and is less prone to weather disruptions. In my case it also cleaned up my images by reducing a haloing effect I got on some HD broadcast material.

Adding an AM21 to an HR21 or newer DVR will solve the off air issue if the HR20 has issues which it shouldn't. I'm running 3 of them on SWM currently and had 4 going at one point.

Ethernet is a bit more scalable with respect to numbers of tuners and overall infrastructure sizing. It's also SWM/non SWIM agnostic but it creates a point of demarcation for support issues you may find frustrating.

Plus there is the FUD regarding that it may be obsoleted going forward but until D* can age out all the receivers dependent on the Ethernet card for the MRV interface it should work just fine.

I have SWM but I run MRV on Ethernet due to the sizing of my infrastructure.

Don "to drink the Kool Aid or to snort it from the pack? that is the question" Bolton



David Carmichael said:


> There are many messages in many different areas so trying to find an answer to my question is kind of hard so here it is sweet and short.
> 
> If you have a working CAT5/6 network is there really any advantage to move to DECA/COXAL setup other than to meet DirecTV's "Supported Hardware"??
> 
> ...


----------



## dminches (Oct 1, 2006)

lugnutathome said:


> BUT SWM may give you a better signal and is less prone to weather disruptions.


Why is that?


----------



## lugnutathome (Apr 13, 2009)

Auto gain adjustment. It's less prone to rain fade.

Not so good compensating for flocks of birds though :grin:

My biggest signal weirdness is from the flocks of birds that use my roof as a dining loft between runs from the cherry orchards :eek2:

Don "Bbbbb Bird, bird, bird, bird is the word" Bolton


dminches said:


> Why is that?


----------



## Barry in Conyers (Jan 14, 2008)

RunnerFL said:


> As mobandit says the biggest thing, right now, is that it moves traffic off your home network freeing up bandwidth for browsing the Internet on your PC, etc.


Not correct.

Routers operate *BETWEEN* logical networks which do not share a common network address.

DirecTV MRV traffic moves *WITHIN* a single logical network and does not require routing.

Using DECA instead of switch isolated Ethernet for MRV does not move any traffic off your home network.

D*oD download traffic must pass through the modem and router whether DECA or Ethernet is used.

Not knocking DECA (I use it), just trying to straighten out some misconceptions.

Just my opinion, YMMV.


----------



## RobertE (Jun 10, 2006)

All this has been rehashed over and over and over and over and over....in this thread http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2479644

:beatdeadhorse:


----------



## Barry in Conyers (Jan 14, 2008)

RobertE said:


> All this has been rehashed over and over and over and over and over....in this thread http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2479644


Apparently not enough to prevent posting incorrect information.


----------



## dsm (Jul 11, 2004)

Re: 
I dont know what has been said before, but the blanket statment that this doesnt help your home network isnt true. MRv over Ethernet hits my home switch, over deca it does not. The switch should isolate the traffic and not affect other ports, but switches have a finite amount of memory for packet buffering. So it can impact other ports and you are better off keeping the point to point traffic on the coax using deca. On demand of course goes through the house fabric.


----------



## David Carmichael (Mar 12, 2007)

RobertE said:


> All this has been rehashed over and over and over and over and over....in this thread http://www.dbstalk.com/showthread.php?p=2479644
> 
> :beatdeadhorse:


And that it part of the problem.. even with all the "talk" I wish somebody with the proper test equipment could run real time tests on the two hardware / wiring set ups and really show ''Graphed'' difference* if any *between the two set ups.

As here is my Cat5/6 set up:
High Speed Modem {Service is rated at 30Mbps} -> "No name [Office Depot]" 10/100 5 port router/hub/WiFi B+G {East Side OF House WiFi Coverage}->
(1)---> Living room "NetGear" 5 port Router ->
(L1) HD-DVD A20 (L2) Panasonic BluRay (L3) HR20 (L3) HR22
(2)---> Wife's Craft Room / Office: "Linksys 5 Port Router/WiFi B+G" {West Side of House WiFi Coverage}->
(W1) Sony BluRay (W2) Networked Printer (W3) Wife's Laptop (W4) ''Future'' HD DirecTV Receiver
(3)---> My Office / Library: "Dynex" 10/100 5 port switch -->
(O1) Computer #1 (O2) Computer #2 (O3) Insignia BluRay (O4) HR21-> RJ45--> HD-DVD A2 
(4)---> Bedroom: "D-Link" 10/100 5 Port Switch ->
(B1) H21 (B2) Insignia BluRay (B3) N/A (B4) N/A

WiFi is used for: Nintendo Wii, iPod, eBook, & NetBook, coverage.

I have done the only stress test I could think of... all computer like devices were set to download software or eBooks, All HDDVR's were set to download VOD programing and record programing from both tuners.. then I had three of the four DirecTV devices cross sharing programing HR20 to HR21 to HR22 to H21 and computer using TVersity to HR20 iTunes HD TV Show....

All shared with no or very little pause/delay.... the only real stutter was when I tried to fast-forward

The only trouble I have had with my current setup to date is after a power outage and rights management to share recorded programing... it was then that DirecTV kind of tried to give me a hard time about support... till I could convince them it was not hardware issue.. but a software issue that they are still looking into.... *It was due to this support issue *that has made me even think of changing to the 'DECA / CLOUD' setup.

avid


----------



## Barry in Conyers (Jan 14, 2008)

dsm said:


> .....the blanket statment that this doesnt help your home network isnt true.


dsm,

If you are referring to my post, I did *NOT* make a blanket statement that DECA doesn't help your home network.

I stated "Using DECA instead of *switch isolated* Ethernet for*MRV* does not move any traffic off your home network."

The attached sketch may help you understand my statement.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

David Carmichael said:


> And that it part of the problem.. even with all the "talk" I wish somebody with the proper test equipment could run real time tests on the two hardware / wiring set ups and really show ''Graphed'' difference* if any *between the two set ups.


This is an impossible task and touches on EXACTLY why DIRECTV wants folks to use DECA. As long as the installer doesn't mess something up, DECA should be the same from customer to customer to customer. There is consistency here, while it theoretically should be possible for each person to exhibit the same "specs" from a DECA installation, there is NO WAY for customers to exhibit the same results from Ethernet installs.

For example, I don't have a NetGear/Linksys router setup you show for yours. So there is no way for my Ethernet results to be the same as your Ethernet results. The simple solution, to be honest is .. If it's already working with Ethernet and you're happy .. keep it, there is not much reason to change. If you are unhappy with the current results or you don't have Ethernet set up yet, get DECA.


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

David Carmichael said:


> The only trouble I have had with my current setup to date is after a power outage and rights management to share recorded programing... it was then that DirecTV kind of tried to give me a hard time about support... till I could convince them it was not hardware issue.. but a software issue that they are still looking into.... *It was due to this support issue* that has made me even think of changing to the 'DECA / CLOUD' setup.


Huh? Because they didn't want to help you with an unsupported setup you wouldn't go with a supported one? Don't you think you would have had an easier time of convincing them it was a software issue if you were using a supported setup?

And as for scientific data to back up the worthiness of an unsupported setup, spend your own time and money to get it. I plan to get my DECA/SWiM setup for free. Personally, I wouldn't spend 2¢ on the answer to this question.


----------



## dminches (Oct 1, 2006)

Despite the fact that I am currently using ethernet and not DECA for MRV, I think it is quite flexible of DirecTV to allow the service to work without using their intended hardware setup. I won't be upset if in the future I am forced to move to DECA. Frankly, I think we are all a bit spoiled.


----------



## mrfatboy (Jan 21, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> This is an impossible task and touches on EXACTLY why DIRECTV wants folks to use DECA. As long as the installer doesn't mess something up, DECA should be the same from customer to customer to customer. There is consistency here, while it theoretically should be possible for each person to exhibit the same "specs" from a DECA installation, there is NO WAY for customers to exhibit the same results from Ethernet installs.
> 
> For example, I don't have a NetGear/Linksys router setup you show for yours. So there is no way for my Ethernet results to be the same as your Ethernet results. The simple solution, to be honest is .. If it's already working with Ethernet and you're happy .. keep it, there is not much reason to change. If you are unhappy with the current results or you don't have Ethernet set up yet, get DECA.


+1


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

Carl Spock said:


> Huh? Because they didn't want to help you with an unsupported setup you wouldn't go with a supported one?


I think he's saying that because of support problems with his unsupported setup, he's thinking of switching to a supported setup.


----------



## David Carmichael (Mar 12, 2007)

spartanstew said:


> I think he's saying that because of support problems with his unsupported setup, he's thinking of switching to a supported setup.


Your correct.. but I have to justify spending what DirecTV is telling me close to $150.00 for hardware and labor... When my current setup is working just fine!

avid


----------



## Carl Spock (Sep 3, 2004)

Got it now. I had it backwards. Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## David Carmichael (Mar 12, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> This is an impossible task and touches on EXACTLY why DIRECTV wants folks to use DECA. >>CUT>> .


I think that if a test was done using a '$5.00 Computer Show (eBay) China Built White Box No Name 10/100 5 Port Switch' with eBay pre-sized-cut 50' Cat5 cables. Three DVR's and the bare mim PC set-up running the PC/DirecTV software & TVersty. This could be the worse case, low budget set up for the test.

Vers.

Using the same Three DVR's + PC and the DECA/Cloud setup using the best cut to size RG6QS compression sealed F5 connectors and a DirecTV approved 10/100 switch (which per their forum seems to be Netgear,) for the PC and Internet connection.

IF the DirecTV setup did not beat hands down the low end setup for pixel drops, line noise and other testable items.

Then to me the DECA/Cloud should only be used where no network connections are already avaiable.

avid


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

dsm said:


> The switch should isolate the traffic and not affect other ports, but switches have a finite amount of memory for packet buffering. So it can impact other ports and you are better off keeping the point to point traffic on the coax using deca.


Have you contemplated the specifications of a modern Ethernet switch?

Here's an example of an under $40 eight port switch from Trendnet versus DECA:


```
GigE   DECA
Speed(Gbps)     1    .27?
Ports           8     16
RAM          128Kb    ??
Duplex        full   half w/scheduling
Fabric         16    .27?
```
Because this has become a religious issue, the truth will probably never prevail either way, but the numbers would seem to be clearly in favor of GigE in terms of bandwidth availability and isolation.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

harsh said:


> This argument is bogus in the presence of switched Ethernet.


Uhh, no it's not.

Again, you should stick to DISH. You don't have DirecTV products and haven't see how they may or may not affect network traffic.


----------



## RunnerFL (Jan 5, 2006)

Barry in Conyers said:


> Using DECA instead of switch isolated Ethernet for MRV does not move any traffic off your home network.


Yes, it does. This was proven in the trials.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

RunnerFL said:


> Uhh, no it's not.


I would ask for documentation and remind you that MoCA is not a DIRECTV invention.

This will never move beyond a religious issue if there's nothing more than isolated evidence or HR24 diagnostic reports to support the claims about DECA. Too many have claimed that DECA was an improvement over their Ethernet setup without setting the stage for the comparison.


----------



## Barry in Conyers (Jan 14, 2008)

RunnerFL said:


> Yes, it does. This was proven in the trials.


Please explain how MRV traffic negatively impacts LAN performance with the layout shown on the sketch I posted earlier.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Barry in Conyers said:


> Please explain how MRV traffic negatively impacts LAN performance with the layout shown on the sketch I posted earlier.


This would of course depend on the actual router .. Not all routers work the same way and a "fully taxed" router may perform significantly worse than the specs .. Meaning if it's just the two devices talking .. yeah, GigE is fine, but 8 devices talking (8 port router) may cause a lot more trouble for the actual gear.

There are reasons why Cisco Enterprise routers are a LOT more expensive than $40 GigE home routers. If the cheap one worked as well, why not use them everywhere.

But, the answer to the specific line of discussion is not really black and white.


----------



## espaeth (Oct 14, 2003)

Doug Brott said:


> This would of course depend on the actual router .. Not all routers work the same way and a "fully taxed" router may perform significantly worse than the specs


Those were depicted as switches in the diagram. As it was drawn, based on the definition of how a switch works, there would be no interplay of unicast traffic on the network as the switch would ... well... switch the traffic to the appropriate edge port without the traffic hitting any of the other attached ports.


----------



## Barry in Conyers (Jan 14, 2008)

Doug Brott said:


> But, the answer to the specific line of discussion is not really black and white.


Sorry Doug, but the answer to the specific line of discussion *IS* black and white. Please look carefully at the sketch and note that the router has nothing to do with the MRV traffic.

If you don't believe me, then believe espaeth who said the same thing more eloquently.


----------



## lugnutathome (Apr 13, 2009)

Not sure why we always have to get our feelings dredged up in this matter and turning it into an argument. Reality is both camps have valid points and either delivery infrastructure will work exceptionally well and both have limitations.

I have not ventured into DECA due to my infrastructure sizing (too many linear feet of cable for a 2 output SWM16 and too far from dish to not have the signal forming equipment in line I have). I am not willing to get into a configuration that might work when I can have one I know will.

I believe a well constructed switched Ethernet network is in the end more scalable and is a more than effective delivery system but it is far too variable for a TV service provider to be able to profitably debug and "maintain" considering the "average consumer" does not know router from switch or why wireless isn't good enough and all the variations on switches, routers, etc in the market. Heck D* is having enough troubles supporting their solution in its early phase.

Having 9 HD receivers (6 DVRs), 4 PCs, 2 internet AV receivers, 4 BluRay players, 2 PS3s, an internet connected TV, location free TV, and network printer attached to a well formed cat5e 10/100 switched network has been superb performance wise. I've tried to soak it but haven't succeeded doing normal things. I could push some multi gig DB files around between PC's and possibly interfere with receivers on switches that share the same "trunklines" from the central switch but really in most homes who is doing that?. 

I get some lag on trickplay but pushing through 2 local area switches via a centralized backbone switch and full path lengths nearing 400 feet I would expect that and I'm not too sure DECA would improve that or even concerned that it would.

If one has an Ethernet network in place and is using better than bargain basement switching it is a viable transport method for WHDVR but it comes at a lack of support price. Its up to the consumer to decide if unsupported is worth it.

DECA provides an end to end solution fully supportable by DTV using the wiring they already pushed through your home for your basic service and is an ideal choice for homes without an existing hard wired functioning network or those not wanting to be network admins for their add on TV service. Also ideal if you don't want to have to struggle with CSRs convincing them your support issues are not related to the unsupported network you are using.

Which one is faster, has more bandwidth, power slides, does doughnuts, etc is moot. Both work, both work well. We can argue till doomsday which is better but in the end only DECA provides a complete supported end to end infrastructure and it frees the consumer from needing to know anything about their environment. For the vast majority of the populace *this* is the way to go.

And this is from a non DECA consumer (by choice).

Don "visualize whirled peas" Bolton


----------



## hasan (Sep 22, 2006)

A nicely put, concise conclusion:

"Which one is faster, has more bandwidth, power slides, does doughnuts, etc is moot. Both work, both work well. We can argue till doomsday which is better but in the end only DECA provides a complete supported end to end infrastructure and it frees the consumer from needing to know anything about their environment. For the vast majority of the populace *this* is the way to go.

And this is from a non DECA consumer (by choice)."

The rest of the back and forth reminds me of my wife's observation about men constantly having to prove themselves superior (in a Freudian sense).


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

Barry in Conyers said:


> Sorry Doug, but the answer to the specific line of discussion *IS* black and white. Please look carefully at the sketch and note that the router has nothing to do with the MRV traffic.
> 
> If you don't believe me, then believe espaeth who said the same thing more eloquently.


If you want to get all technical .. OK. I'm using "router" and "switch" as the same thing as that is very often the case in homes.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

lugnutathome said:


> Not sure why we always have to get our feelings dredged up in this matter and turning it into an argument. Reality is both camps have valid points and either delivery infrastructure will work exceptionally well and both have limitations.


I think folks get bent out of shape when I say DECA > Ethernet :grin:

For the purposes of MRV and installation and support and for general consistency .. yeah, that's the right answer ..

Ethernet's great in some cases, but will cause problems in other situations. Just trying to keep it simple with respect to DIRECTV setups. You definitely won't gain anything with respect to MRV by going to an uber-fast Ethernet setup except for perhaps a larger bill.


----------



## Barry in Conyers (Jan 14, 2008)

Doug Brott said:


> I think folks get bent out of shape when I say DECA > Ethernet :grin:
> 
> For the purposes of MRV and installation and support and for general consistency .. yeah, that's the right answer ..
> 
> Ethernet's great in some cases, but will cause problems in other situations. Just trying to keep it simple with respect to DIRECTV setups. You definitely won't gain anything with respect to MRV by going to an uber-fast Ethernet setup except for perhaps a larger bill.


Doug,

I agree with most of what you said except the part about why people get bent out of shape. I don't get bent out of shape when anyone, including you, says that DECA is a better solution than ethernet for MRV or D*oD. There is no doubt that DECA is easier to install and should certainly be easier for DirecTV to properly support. I am comfortable with ethernet, but I chose to use DECA because it was easier. Not because it offered better performance, but because it was easier.

I do object when anyone, including you, makes incorrect statements regarding the advantages / disadvantages of DECA and ethernet. DECA is a good solution and I don't see any legitimate reason to make incorrect or misleading claims.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Doug Brott said:


> There are reasons why Cisco Enterprise routers are a LOT more expensive than $40 GigE home routers.


Don't confuse expensive (and notoriously bug-bitten) routers with inexpensive switches. Expensive routers (and to some extent, managed switches) are used to route as well as supporting VLANs and VPN tunnels.

Switches do just fine at what they do and involve far less magic than the Domain Master of a MoCA network.

I suspect your association of broadband routers with the state of the art of home LANs is clouding your vision. Most home LANs are getting enough goodies attached that many homes have a standalone switch connecting most of the devices. By the time that you get your optical disc player, your gaming console and a couple of media receivers (A/V, DBS, DLNA) connected, you're well past depending upon the questionable four port switch built into your router.

In my case, my broadband router is wired only to my main LAN switch and my SIP adapter.


----------



## inkahauts (Nov 13, 2006)

harsh said:


> Don't confuse expensive (and notoriously bug-bitten) routers with inexpensive switches.


Please stop confusing the Dish forums with the directv ones, because you are obviously confusing your Dish and Ethernet setup with that of a directv and deca/ethernet one and giving information to everyone as though you own it and know what it does better than someone who actually does own Directv equipment and has first hand experience with the equipment... Your showing a lot of its bigger its better reasoning and yet thats just not always true, or accurate. I'll take a solid solution with less potential excess overhead over a possibly inconsistent setup with the possibility of giving you more overhead any day of the week... This form a person currently running a hybryd situation with both deca and Ethernet connected equipment.


----------



## PennyPincherP (Aug 18, 2010)

> Here's an example of an under $40 eight port switch from Trendnet versus DECA:
> 
> 
> ```
> ...


You can get these now for $30. But then I'm biased since I have a 5 port (or 2) in pratically every room.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

PennyPincherP said:


> You can get these now for $30. But then I'm biased since I have a 5 port (or 2) in pratically every room.


While this approach may be cheaper to step into, it takes away from the unique pathways advantage that a single switch offers over your subdivided model or the MoCA fully shared half duplex model.

When measuring economies of scale, you also need to consider that each switch you add consumes one of its own ports to uplink. Each 5 port switch you add only adds capacity for four devices and forces those four devices to share the uplink port when accessing the rest of the LAN.


----------



## PennyPincherP (Aug 18, 2010)

harsh said:


> Each 5 port switch you add only adds capacity for four devices and forces those four devices to share the uplink port when accessing the rest of the LAN.


True but I only have at most 2 ports in each room wired to the media closet. The builder charged $100-120 per port.:grin:


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

harsh said:


> Don't confuse expensive (and notoriously bug-bitten) routers with inexpensive switches. Expensive routers (and to some extent, managed switches) are used to route as well as supporting VLANs and VPN tunnels.
> 
> Switches do just fine at what they do and involve far less magic than the Domain Master of a MoCA network.
> 
> ...


There is SOOO much wrong with your statements and assessment.

#1: There is a SIGNIFICANT difference between an enterprise switch and a home router/switch - even if its labeled Gig-E. We can talk memory, processor, algorithm, physical data path, SoC, and backplane. Which one do you think wins in each of those comparisons? Using enterprise class specs and switch performance, and equating that to your $40 all in one Home device or your $100 Gig-E switch is laughable.

#2: This isn't taking into account the traffic needs for streaming video - which is NOT bandwidth bandwidth bandwidth. Its controlled data flow with prioritization of control packets. A different ballgame.

#3: We won't even begin to discuss the fact that making an assumption that Joe Six Pack has a modern Wireless-N router connected to a $100 Gig-E switch (which still doesn't match what an Enterprise class switch is architecturally) is entirely misinformed.

Its not religious... its fact based. And I think some people who have never touched/used DECA need to reconsider spewing incorrect facts.

Does Ethernet work? Absolutely. Is DECA architecturally a better solution for DirecTV MRV? Yes. Is there technical advantages to using DECA over Ethernet? Yes, including ease of installation, automatic QoS and prioritization, and traffic isolation - which any network architect will tell you are ALL good things. Are there bad things with DECA... Yep... the bias of people who think switch Ethernet is the ONLY valid data layer architecture out there simply because its a defacto standard.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

FWIW - We had Gb Ethernet and used MRV for months with it. While troubleshooting the audio drop issue we were upgraded to new dish, SWiM/DECA. After using DECA for over a month, we switched it all back to Ethernet (still SWiM).

For us, after 4 or 5 streams got going on DECA we would get picture issues. We also had two units that would drop off the list what seemed like every other day. 

Since going back to Ethernet the issues are gone. The two problem units have been going over a month now without any disconnects and I don't see any picture issues when everyone is home using the system.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

wavemaster said:


> FWIW - We had Gb Ethernet and used MRV for months with it. While troubleshooting the audio drop issue we were upgraded to new dish, SWiM/DECA. After using DECA for over a month, we switched it all back to Ethernet (still SWiM).
> 
> For us, after 4 or 5 streams got going on DECA we would get picture issues. We also had two units that would drop off the list what seemed like every other day.
> 
> Since going back to Ethernet the issues are gone. The two problem units have been going over a month now without any disconnects and I don't see any picture issues when everyone is home using the system.


Let's keep this in perspective .. You have way more than the average number of DVRs. Most folks will never reach 4 or 5 streams at the exact same time.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

Doug Brott said:


> Let's keep this in perspective .. You have way more than the average number of DVRs. Most folks will never reach 4 or 5 streams at the exact same time.


Granted - however if you have a unit that keeps dropping off the list (even if you only have 2, try Ethernet - that could solve the issue as it did for our problem units.

As far as our 8DVR setup, it is what it is, we had multiple issues on DECA and none of the same issues on Ethernet. We were told by all but a few on here that DECA was superior to Ethernet and DirectTV themselves said DECA should have no problem with our setup. Obviously most of the yes men here and the csr's at DirectTV are seriously biased or simply don't understand DECA's limitations.

After THOROUGHLY testing each system OUR Gb Ethernet network is FAR superior to DECA - YMMV. Sure we lose out on support, (I think? - because we are a DECA install in their system) but take away the problems that DECA introduced, and we have no need for support.


----------



## Tom_S (Apr 9, 2002)

wavemaster said:


> For us, after 4 or 5 streams got going on DECA we would get picture issues. We also had two units that would drop off the list what seemed like every other day.


Jeez.. doesn't anybody in your house watch what's on their own DVR? What's with all the streaming?


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

wavemaster said:


> Granted - however if you have a unit that keeps dropping off the list (even if you only have 2, try Ethernet - that could solve the issue as it did for our problem units.
> 
> As far as our 8DVR setup, it is what it is, we had multiple issues on DECA and none of the same issues on Ethernet. We were told by all but a few on here that DECA was superior to Ethernet and DirectTV themselves said DECA should have no problem with our setup. Obviously most of the yes men here and the csr's at DirectTV are seriously biased or simply don't understand DECA's limitations.
> 
> After THOROUGHLY testing each system OUR Gb Ethernet network is FAR superior to DECA - YMMV. Sure we lose out on support, (I think? - because we are a DECA install in their system) but take away the problems that DECA introduced, and we have no need for support.


But you never really troubleshot the issues you had either... to be fair.

Multiple cases have been resolved with respect to receivers dropping off/freezing playlists.

Does DECA have limitations? Yes. No one here has said that it doesn't. But, you also didn't really try to fix your issues. You said Ethernet was better. You put DECA on to try it, saw some issues, and pulled it out. Thats fine - its your choice. But please, enough with the "yes men" comments and such. DECA works wonderfully for most people, and it has advantages, just as it has disadvantages. Glad Ethernet worked for you - no one here thinks less of you for it. Now please stop bashing people who recommend DECA.


----------



## Tom_S (Apr 9, 2002)

BudShark said:


> But you never really troubleshot the issues you had either... to be fair.
> 
> Multiple cases have been resolved with respect to receivers dropping off/freezing playlists.
> 
> Does DECA have limitations? Yes. No one here has said that it doesn't. But, you also didn't really try to fix your issues. You said Ethernet was better. You put DECA on to try it, saw some issues, and pulled it out. Thats fine - its your choice. But please, enough with the "yes men" comments and such. DECA works wonderfully for most people, and it has advantages, just as it has disadvantages. Glad Ethernet worked for you - no one here thinks less of you for it. Now please stop bashing people who recommend DECA.


I agree. I was on gigE and have switched to DECA. I see no difference in the performance of MRV. However, saving 2 ports on my switch is very nice, as well as not having to run another line to my new third receiver.

Works great.. less ports..


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

Tom_S said:


> Jeez.. doesn't anybody in your house watch what's on their own DVR? What's with all the streaming?


All we have is DVR's

After a full audit of what is being recorded several months ago, we found a TON of duplicate SP's like Bones on 5 DVR's.

So we have broken out several DVR's to handle just sports, just movies, just daytime etc. It has greatly increased storage because there are no longer any duplicates. The downside is you do a lot more streaming.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

BudShark said:


> But you never really troubleshot the issues you had either... to be fair.
> 
> Multiple cases have been resolved with respect to receivers dropping off/freezing playlists.
> 
> Does DECA have limitations? Yes. No one here has said that it doesn't. But, you also didn't really try to fix your issues. You said Ethernet was better. You put DECA on to try it, saw some issues, and pulled it out. Thats fine - its your choice. But please, enough with the "yes men" comments and such. DECA works wonderfully for most people, and it has advantages, just as it has disadvantages. Glad Ethernet worked for you - no one here thinks less of you for it. Now please stop bashing people who recommend DECA.


DirecTV came back out twice to test the system and resolve the dropping out issues. Everything tested out fine and the two problem units ALWAYS connect after rebooting them - D* seemed to think that daily reboots was OK and normal.

So we DID have it tested by D* themselves. That was over 6 weeks ago now. Should I keep calling back and getting the tech out here?


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

wavemaster said:


> DirecTV came back out twice to test the system and resolve the dropping out issues. Everything tested out fine and the two problem units ALWAYS connect after rebooting them - D* seemed to think that daily reboots was OK and normal.
> 
> So we DID have it tested by D* themselves. That was over 6 weeks ago now. Should I keep calling back and getting the tech out here?


No - and so far in 2 of the 3 cases I am aware of the problems actually came from outside the DECA environment (an area you are more familiar with than DirecTV).

You obviously are comfortable with Ethernet - thats fine. But, you seem to imply over and over that because your Ethernet environment worked better, that makes Ethernet a better medium... all the while forgetting people like Rich and others who posted that in a similar load, similar setup to yours, DECA worked fine. So - yes, Ethernet is a viable solution... no one said otherwise. But, the facts hold that DECA is fine as well and running around bashing people who say so doesn't add anything.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

BudShark said:


> There is SOOO much wrong with your statements and assessment.
> 
> #1: There is a SIGNIFICANT difference between an enterprise switch and a home router/switch - even if its labeled Gig-E. We can talk memory, processor, algorithm, physical data path, SoC, and backplane. Which one do you think wins in each of those comparisons? Using enterprise class specs and switch performance, and equating that to your $40 all in one Home device or your $100 Gig-E switch is laughable.


It comes down to whether or not it makes any difference in a residential MRV installation. I would hope that you would agree that it makes little to no difference in that context.


> #2: This isn't taking into account the traffic needs for streaming video - which is NOT bandwidth bandwidth bandwidth. Its controlled data flow with prioritization of control packets. A different ballgame.


It isn't even a ballgame as there is no need to prioritize or control flow. Switched Ethernet offers the user essentially unobstructed access to and from other nodes on the network. Suggesting that there might be traffic conflicts is ludicrous within the confines of the residential DIRECTV one-to-one MRV model.


> #3: We won't even begin to discuss the fact that making an assumption that Joe Six Pack has a modern Wireless-N router connected to a $100 Gig-E switch (which still doesn't match what an Enterprise class switch is architecturally) is entirely misinformed.


I'm aghast that you bring up this comparison of enterprise class versus consumer grade in a discussion of residential LAN use. What is your point? Do you believe the demands of a residential scenario come anywhere near taxing the capabilities of a modern consumer level GigE switch?


> Its not religious... its fact based. And I think some people who have never touched/used DECA need to reconsider spewing incorrect facts.


When you cite examples that are simply not present in residential MRV applications, it is most surely a religious issue because there's certainly no practical reason to shout "enterprise class" and get bound up in discussions of equipment best suited to traffic levels in the terabytes and node counts in the dozens.


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

harsh... seriously. Everything you say is based on what you *think* would happen since you don't have DECA, you don't have DirecTV, and you don't have DirecTVs implementation of MRV.

On the other hand, myself, wavemaster, VOS, and others have actually tested it. We may have disagreements, but we've tested it and have hands on experience with both environments giving validity to what we say.

We've discussed this in enough threads that I don't need to repeat myself - but suffice it to say you have a very ignorant view of Streaming Video traffic needs, and what traffic flow on MOCA is as opposed to Ethernet.

The original posters questions was specific... I think its been answered. I don't want to turn this into another pissing match, so I'm done. If you actually care about the topic you can PM me to discuss.


----------



## mrfatboy (Jan 21, 2007)

I'm using the ethernet setup with no problems. I'm on a 100mbit backbone. There is a 3-4 second delay when starting a program from another HR2x. It's no biggy. I don't know if the delay is caused by the HR23 in the system (it's so slow  ) or just that it needs that time to start the streaming in general. I could justify buying a Gigabit switch if I knew that delay went away.

Can anybody tell me that has a Deca or a Gigabit ethernet backbone see a delay when starting to play a program from another DVR? If so, how much? Why type of HDDVR's are in your system. I would guess that an all HR24 network system would be the fastest.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

mrfatboy said:


> I'm using the ethernet setup with no problems. I'm on a 100mbit backbone. There is a 3-4 second delay when starting a program from another HR2x. It's no biggy. I don't know if the delay is caused by the HR23 in the system (it's so slow  ) or just that it needs that time to start the streaming in general. I could justify buying a Gigabit switch if I knew that delay went away.
> 
> Can anybody tell me that has a Deca or a Gigabit ethernet backbone see a delay when starting to play a program from another DVR? If so, how much? Why type of HDDVR's are in your system. I would guess that an all HR24 network system would be the fastest.


I get about the same delay starting a remote program on Gig as I did on DECA I think 3-4 sec is probably normal.


----------



## lugnutathome (Apr 13, 2009)

From what I've gleaned from reading all the chatter on the matter, it would seem likely no different no matter which infrastructure. From an Ethernet perspective it cannot change with a gig switch as both the server and client are networked at 10/100. DECA users seem to note a similar delay.

Even in those rare instances where I am forced to use the local host as my server and client, it seems to be delayed on start up. Trickplay is a bit more precise but I'm not having an instructional conversation on over 300ft of wire so I would expect it to be a bit more crisp.

Don "no need to fix what isn't broken" Bolton



mrfatboy said:


> I'm using the ethernet setup with no problems. I'm on a 100mbit backbone. There is a 3-4 second delay when starting a program from another HR2x. It's no biggy. I don't know if the delay is caused by the HR23 in the system (it's so slow  ) or just that it needs that time to start the streaming in general. I could justify buying a Gigabit switch if I knew that delay went away.
> 
> Can anybody tell me that has a Deca or a Gigabit ethernet backbone see a delay when starting to play a program from another DVR? If so, how much? Why type of HDDVR's are in your system. I would guess that an all HR24 network system would be the fastest.


----------



## mrfatboy (Jan 21, 2007)

wavemaster said:


> I get about the same delay starting a remote program on Gig as I did on DECA I think 3-4 sec is probably normal.


I figured  It's probably not worth it to upgrade to a gigabit backbone now. The HR2x's are the only things that are active on my net. I've got $200 credit at Newegg that's burning a hole in my pocket.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

BudShark said:


> No - and so far in 2 of the 3 cases I am aware of the problems actually came from outside the DECA environment (an area you are more familiar with than DirecTV).
> 
> You obviously are comfortable with Ethernet - thats fine. But, you seem to imply over and over that because your Ethernet environment worked better, that makes Ethernet a better medium... all the while forgetting people like Rich and others who posted that in a similar load, similar setup to yours, DECA worked fine. So - yes, Ethernet is a viable solution... no one said otherwise. But, the facts hold that DECA is fine as well and running around bashing people who say so doesn't add anything.


I don't remember "running" around anywhere, or "bashing" anyone. I have REPEATEDLY stated "In our case" "In our installation" "our results" meaning the household. I have never told anyone to switch. All I ever said is if in doubt "try" ethernet, or if you already have it, by all means use it.

In our case Ethernet was ABSOLUTELY better than DECA. It is not an opinion, it is based on 6+ weeks of testing. In our installation Ethernet beats DECA in every measure - reliability, speed, throughput. Most important to me is reliability, on DECA we would be rebooting a unit what seemed like everyday, since we switched back to Ethernet there has not been a single reboot.


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

wavemaster said:


> I don't remember "running" around anywhere, or "bashing" anyone. I have REPEATEDLY stated "In our case" "In our installation" "our results" meaning the household. I have never told anyone to switch. All I ever said is if in doubt "try" ethernet, or if you already have it, by all means use it.





wavemaster said:


> Obviously most of the yes men here and the csr's at DirectTV are seriously biased or simply don't understand DECA's limitations.


I was referring to this unnecessary statement you made earlier.



> In our case Ethernet was ABSOLUTELY better than DECA. It is not an opinion, it is based on 6+ weeks of testing. In our installation Ethernet beats DECA in every measure - reliability, speed, throughput. Most important to me is reliability, on DECA we would be rebooting a unit what seemed like everyday, since we switched back to Ethernet there has not been a single reboot.


And as I said, you didn't troubleshoot the DECA side of it, and thats fine. That was your choice. Obviously something was wrong in your DECA environment as I think we'd be hearing of outrage if people were having to boot their receivers every day. And yes, there are people who have just as many DVRs as you on DECA.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

mrfatboy said:


> I figured  It probably not worth it to upgrade to a gigabit backbone now. The HR2x's are the only things that are active on my net. I've got $200 credit at Newegg that's burning a hole in my pocket.


Mmmmmmmm newEgg

I got a big Gb NAS box there a few months ago.

MRV shouldn't drive your decision to go Gb, if you have a bunch of DVR's maybe. 100Mb is fine for a few DVR's. If you were out to buy a switch, always throw the few extra bucks (if you have them) for Gb. Even if all your devices are 100Mb they will still benefit from the faster processor and memory in the Gb switch.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

BudShark said:


> I was referring to this unnecessary statement you made earlier.
> 
> And as I said, you didn't troubleshoot the DECA side of it, and thats fine. That was your choice. Obviously something was wrong in your DECA environment as I think we'd be hearing of outrage if people were having to boot their receivers every day. And yes, there are people who have just as many DVRs as you on DECA.


The statement was true. It's usefulness is up to the reader - I'll jot down your vote.

I did all the troubleshooting I was able to. DirectTV sent our 2 crews on two different occasions to troubleshoot as well. What else should I have done?


----------



## mrfatboy (Jan 21, 2007)

wavemaster said:


> Mmmmmmmm newEgg
> 
> I got a big Gb NAS box there a few months ago.
> 
> MRV shouldn't drive your decision to go Gb, if you have a bunch of DVR's maybe. 100Mb is fine for a few DVR's. If you were out to buy a switch, always throw the few extra bucks (if you have them) for Gb. Even if all your devices are 100Mb they will still benefit from the faster processor and memory in the Gb switch.


Agreed, I'm a "if I'll use it, I'll buy it" type of guy. No need now! I'll just have to buy something else


----------



## lugnutathome (Apr 13, 2009)

Bud:

Could you please elaborate on these cases a bit. OK to do so in PM if you so choose.

I'm an Ethernet user by need and typically support the vast majority of subscribers using DECA but I have seen a lot of "losing connection" incidents in the forums here and on D*'s tech forums.

I'm curious as to the cause as it does seem to be fairly notable and seems to be primarily on DECA and the 24 series equipment seems to sit high on the list of these incidents as well...

I'm imagining the auto detect for connection source on these units gets confusing information during normal operation and forces a reset outside a boot cycle orphaning the unit from the stack. But I've neither DECA nor a 24 series unit so it's pure speculation base on single sided observation.

Just curiosity mind you. Till there is a 4 output SWM16 (I'm pushing far too much wire length to try a DECA conversion for just 2 outputs). Especially given a business quality 10/100 backbone switch serves my 9 receivers perfectly at present. (no need to fix that which isn't broken).

Don "just tryin to git edumecated" Bolton



BudShark said:


> No - and so far in 2 of the 3 cases I am aware of the problems actually came from outside the DECA environment (an area you are more familiar with than DirecTV).


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

wavemaster said:


> The statement was true. It's usefulness is up to the reader - I'll jot down your vote.


:nono:



> I did all the troubleshooting I was able to. DirectTV sent our 2 crews on two different occasions to troubleshoot as well. What else should I have done?


Spent time discussing it with people on this site who provide assistance. That is what others have done with arguably very good results.

I don't care what you use. I do care when you bash people who spend time helping others, and that you make statements regarding limitations of DECA that aren't true (yes, we KNOW it didn't work for you, but its worked for others with as many DVRs - its not a DECA limitation it was a problem in your installation).

I give you credit for trying DECA - I always have. I don't give you credit/respect for continuing to call people Yes men, or state they don't know things when they clearly do but just have a different perspective.


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

lugnutathome said:


> Bud:
> 
> Could you please elaborate on these cases a bit. OK to do so in PM if you so choose.
> 
> ...


The 3 "known" causes of DECA MRV disconnects were the following:

1) Broadband DECA failure
2) A router configured for scheduled reboots (it was DD-WRT setting left over from earlier testing for a non-MRV issue)
3) DHCP Reserved addresses (resolved by changing to static addresses, did not test non-reserved addresses)


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

lugnutathome said:


> B
> I'm curious as to the cause as it does seem to be fairly notable and seems to be primarily on DECA and the 24 series equipment seems to sit high on the list of these incidents as well...
> 
> I'm imagining the auto detect for connection source on these units gets confusing information during normal operation and forces a reset outside a boot cycle orphaning the unit from the stack. But I've neither DECA nor a 24 series unit so it's pure speculation base on single sided observation.
> ...


I figured I'd answer these separately.

I'd imagine the 24 is high in the list of MRV problems mostly because its the primary box being installed for MRV installations. I haven't heard/seen anything that implies the box has issues. The auto-switching between ethernet and DECA isn't really all that advanced - it almost looks more mechnical than anything. If Ethernet is plugged in when the box boots it uses that... otherwise, DECA.

4 output SWM16? Piece of cake. Put a splitter at the output of the SWM16 and you've got 4 outputs... or am I not understanding?


----------



## lugnutathome (Apr 13, 2009)

SWM8's have 2 powered outputs each and in order to push all the line I have strung out in my residence I use both outputs on each. Apparently DECA can only use one of those outputs hence the SWM16 only having 2 instead of 4...

Yes you can split an output but it reduces the signal in doing so. My farthest reaching line 191 ft in length is technically below required signal strength when fed from an 8 way splitter. I run it and another not so long run off the second SWM out port from a 2 way.

I've a similar configuration on the other SWM8 in my realm. My home does not fit the typical install model and was wired up like a commercial install would be. My "head end" is 150 ft from the dish with service lines out to 191 ft. Slick as I've a central point for my Internet, Ethernet, Satellite, and Terrestrial networking. Not so slick as it does not conform to D*'s "one size fits all" residential service model. I've run in some ways "unsupported" since I activated service.

And as to the 8 way and signal loss VOS did the calculations for me the day I had the SWM8s installed and was having issues with several receivers. I tend to think he's got a handle on that sort if thing

Thanks for the responses!

Don "just a old kid with too many toys" Bolton



BudShark said:


> I figured I'd answer these separately.
> 
> I'd imagine the 24 is high in the list of MRV problems mostly because its the primary box being installed for MRV installations. I haven't heard/seen anything that implies the box has issues. The auto-switching between ethernet and DECA isn't really all that advanced - it almost looks more mechnical than anything. If Ethernet is plugged in when the box boots it uses that... otherwise, DECA.
> 
> 4 output SWM16? Piece of cake. Put a splitter at the output of the SWM16 and you've got 4 outputs... or am I not understanding?


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

I'm late to the party but here's my $0.02. . . SUPPORT. That one word summarizes D*'s decision to go DECA. The field guys know coax and coax connectors. . . beyond that there's a few installers that may know ethernet, but the combination of routers, switches and other devices make me NOT want to support it.

I've posted over and over that if you put your H/HR2xes on a separate switch, you can isolate the bulk of traffic from your local LAN. I've also posted that there are some really BAD home networks implemented -- things like laptops working very poorly because they're connecting to the neighbors unsecured wireless rather than the local LAN because the connectivity is so bad.

I'm sorry, but DECA is Ethernet over Coax. . . It seems to have RJ-45 Ethernet connectors on each end. I don't care how may layers or what optimization it may have internally, it looks like a ~200MBs Hub -- not sure one was ever made-- but it works with 6 or 7 - maybe 8 DVRs . . no better, no worse than a good wired network.

NO ONE had produced any CONCRETE advantage of one over the other. If you have it, start a thread.

So bottom line. If your existing network is working fine with your H/HRs and you don't need D* support, you don't need DECA. I changed from a perfectly good wired / wireless N network that was near perfect with lots of MRV testing when I added a 5th DVR and SWiM 16. I still have the same delay on starting a program. And I also posted during testing that I couldn't discern any difference between wired or wireless performance. 

If I weren't so lazy and busy on other things, I'd hook up the wired / wireless again and make some comparisons, but then folks would say that's just my configuration.

I'm happy with DECA, I'm sure it consumes more power than a wired network but who's counting kilowatt hours???


----------



## lugnutathome (Apr 13, 2009)

I find item #2 interesting as I was wondering if a similar instruction might be present in the DECA cloud's firmware.

The voices in my head were suggesting to me such may be present as a left over from when coax was the transport cable for networking and D* was using updates to that era's switching equipment's firmware as the basis to return to coax.

My mind... is a terrible thing

Don "but with all the voices I'm never alone :hurah:" Bolton



BudShark said:


> The 3 "known" causes of DECA MRV disconnects were the following:
> 
> 1) Broadband DECA failure
> 2) A router configured for scheduled reboots (it was DD-WRT setting left over from earlier testing for a non-MRV issue)
> 3) DHCP Reserved addresses (resolved by changing to static addresses, did not test non-reserved addresses)


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

dennisj00 said:


> I'm sorry, but DECA is Ethernet over Coax. . . It seems to have RJ-45 Ethernet connectors on each end.


You are thinking of whats on the other end of a DECA (DirecTV Ethernet to Coax Adapter)... the DECA is a bridge from MOCA to Ethernet. But one thing DECA definitely is NOT is Ethernet. DECA/MOCA is much more related to Token Ring than Ethernet.


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

lugnutathome said:


> I find item #2 interesting as I was wondering if a similar instruction might be present in the DECA cloud's firmware.
> 
> The voices in my head were suggesting to me such may be present as a left over from when coax was the transport cable for networking and D* was using updates to that era's switching equipment's firmware as the basis to return to coax.
> 
> ...


Since there is no "switch" or "hub" in a DECA cloud you can't really reboot the cloud - but it would be possible to make each DECA component reboot... but there's been no evidence of that to date. There's some pretty clear broadcasts that a DECA makes when it comes online... and I don't see those present if you just leave it up and running...


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

BudShark said:


> DECA/MOCA is much more related to Token Ring than Ethernet.


And that's a good thing???!!!


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

dennisj00 said:


> And that's a good thing???!!!


Sigh... :nono:

In the context of a closed video streaming network with known bandwidth needs, control packets that benefit from the built in prioritization in MOCA, the ease of installation due to the physical cabling, and the bandwidth (with cloud speeds in excess of 200Mb) - Yes, actually it is a good thing.

There are several threads on this forum - search for DECA vs Ethernet.

Assuming MOCA is bad because its a shared token based system is the equivalent of thinking Ethernet is bad because you remember it from the old 10Base shared days.


----------



## dennisj00 (Sep 27, 2007)

Once again, the only thing I agree with is . . 'the ease of installation due to the physical cabling'. That is the ONLY reason it's supported by D*.

Everything else is pretty much the same, no matter what words are used.


----------



## JimAtTheRez (May 9, 2008)

So, I have 4 HD DVR's(1-20, 1-22, 2-23's,) and 1 H24 receiver. My router is a Linksys WRT54G, and there is a cat 5 cable into it from one of the 23's in my office. My MRV has been working great for a couple of months, but suddenly recordings from the office have started to stutter, especially on my HR20 in my living room. I have no clue what to check. Any advice for a novice such as me? Thanks in advance for your help.


----------



## DogLover (Mar 19, 2007)

JimAtTheRez said:


> So, I have 4 HD DVR's(1-20, 1-22, 2-23's,) and 1 H24 receiver. My router is a Linksys WRT54G, and there is a cat 5 cable into it from one of the 23's in my office. My MRV has been working great for a couple of months, but suddenly recordings from the office have started to stutter, especially on my HR20 in my living room. I have no clue what to check. Any advice for a novice such as me? Thanks in advance for your help.


First thing to check is if the recordings have problems on the DVR they are recorded on. Play them local, and if you still see problems. If there are problems playing the program locally, then it is likely a problem with that DVR.


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

JimAtTheRez said:


> So, I have 4 HD DVR's(1-20, 1-22, 2-23's,) and 1 H24 receiver. My router is a Linksys WRT54G, and there is a cat 5 cable into it from one of the 23's in my office. My MRV has been working great for a couple of months, but suddenly recordings from the office have started to stutter, especially on my HR20 in my living room. I have no clue what to check. Any advice for a novice such as me? Thanks in advance for your help.


I'd suggest verifying as Dog says... then after that, give us a feel for how your system is setup from the dish on down.

Also - describe the source (it sounds like its either a 22 or one of the 23s) and what the result is. You seem to imply its worse in some areas than others.


----------



## BudShark (Aug 11, 2003)

dennisj00 said:


> Once again, the only thing I agree with is . . 'the ease of installation due to the physical cabling'. That is the ONLY reason it's supported by D*.
> 
> Everything else is pretty much the same, no matter what words are used.


If you're happy, I'm happy.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

BudShark said:


> Sigh... :nono:
> 
> In the context of a closed video streaming network with known bandwidth needs, control packets that benefit from the built in prioritization in MOCA, the ease of installation due to the physical cabling, and the bandwidth (with cloud speeds in excess of 200Mb) - Yes, actually it is a good thing.
> 
> ...


Is DECA even using prioritization?

When we had it running here one of my engineers came to the house and set up a mirroring port to read all the traffic in and out, we hooked it up to a lab laptop and let it run for the weekend. He said there is NO prioritization in the headers of the packets (video, menu's, trickplay etc.). None. Has that changed?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

BudShark said:


> harsh... seriously. Everything you say is based on what you *think* would happen since you don't have DECA, you don't have DirecTV, and you don't have DirecTVs implementation of MRV.


If you look carefully, I haven't said very much regarding DECA that isn't widely accepted. You've simply let your imagination run wild.

Most of what I know of DECA has come from the forums and a relatively scholarly study of MoCA that is decidedly better documented and rounded out with scientifically documented testing.

My goal has been to identify the red herring arguments against switched Ethernet that have been varied and legion. Arguments of collisions and contention have been high on my list. Comparisons to large corporate and multicast networks have also been something that one might use to bait a large hook.

Threads like these seem to end up being dominated by vociferous exclamations of religious dogma and that's sad because it is misleading and misrepresents what both DECA and switched Ethernet bring to the dance.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

wavemaster said:


> When we had it running here one of my engineers came to the house and set up a mirroring port to read all the traffic in and out, we hooked it up to a lab laptop and let it run for the weekend. He said there is NO prioritization in the headers of the packets (video, menu's, trickplay etc.). None. Has that changed?


As MoCA can utilize optimized (taking advantage of the relatively small size of the cloud) header compression, it may not be showing its hand regarding priority in the conventional manner.

Consider that the DECA administrator might recognize and remember which devices are servers and which are clients and prioritize transport controls over content in that way.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

harsh said:


> As MoCA can utilize optimized (taking advantage of the relatively small size of the cloud) header compression, it may not be showing its hand regarding priority in the conventional manner.
> 
> Consider that the DECA administrator might recognize and remember which devices are servers and which are clients and prioritize transport controls over content in that way.


Sure but shouldn't there be clear QoS/prioritization use on trickplay etc. This goes over my head which is why we employ engineers to handle it, however my engineer that analyzed it said there is NO difference in packets between trick play or streaming video.


----------



## Barry in Conyers (Jan 14, 2008)

Very few people would take a MRV system (2 HR-24's & 1 H24) that was working very well with DECA and change to Ethernet, but that is exactly what I did. Why? Because I was tired of reading that D*ECA is superior to Ethernet and wanted to see for myself.

I temporarily connected Ethernet cables from each DVR / receiver to a 3COM GigE switch and let the WRT54G router assign IP addresses (DHCP, just like my D*ECA setup).

I could not see any difference in MRV, D*oD or TVApps performance between D*ECA and Ethernet.

Just because I could, I replaced the 3Com GigE switch with a Linksys 5-port Fast Ethernet (100 mbps) switch. If there was any difference in performance between the GigE and FastE switch, it was very small.

After a couple of days, SWMBO got tired of the Ethernet cables running through the house on the floor and I changed back to D*ECA.

As far as I can tell, the only things wrong with Ethernet for MRV are that it requires some basic networking knowledge and does not have the DirecTV logo.

Just my experience; YMMV.


----------



## wavemaster (Sep 15, 2007)

Barry in Conyers said:


> Very few people would take a MRV system (2 HR-24's & 1 H24) that was working very well with DECA and change to Ethernet, but that is exactly what I did. Why? Because I was tired of reading that D*ECA is superior to Ethernet and wanted to see for myself.
> 
> I temporarily connected Ethernet cables from each DVR / receiver to a 3COM GigE switch and let the WRT54G router assign IP addresses (DHCP, just like my D*ECA setup).
> 
> ...


When we see the big dif is when 5 streams are running - Ethernet handles it much better in our case.

We also don't have to constantly reboot the DVR's to keep them connected.

Glad you took the time to run the test. So many hear just read what D* or the high posters print and take it as gospel.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

wavemaster said:


> When we see the big dif is when 5 streams are running - Ethernet handles it much better in our case.
> 
> We also don't have to constantly reboot the DVR's to keep them connected.
> 
> Glad you took the time to run the test. So many hear just read what D* or the high posters print and take it as gospel.


Is the horse still dead? Also...+1 to this:


BudShark said:


> ...
> I don't care what you use. I do care when you bash people who spend time helping others, and that you make statements regarding limitations of DECA that aren't true (yes, we KNOW it didn't work for you, but its worked for others with as many DVRs - its not a DECA limitation it was a problem in your installation).
> 
> I give you credit for trying DECA - I always have. I don't give you credit/respect for continuing to call people Yes men, or state they don't know things when they clearly do but just have a different perspective.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

wavemaster said:


> Sure but shouldn't there be clear QoS/prioritization use on trickplay etc. This goes over my head which is why we employ engineers to handle it, however my engineer that analyzed it said there is NO difference in packets between trick play or streaming video.


The critical difference may be where the packets originate from. It may also have something to do with the size of the packet. There is more than one way to skin a catfish and the conventional corporate network model may not be the best as applied to MRV.


----------



## JACKIEGAGA (Dec 11, 2006)

Im hardwired and never had any problems


----------



## DogLover (Mar 19, 2007)

wavemaster said:


> When we see the big dif is when 5 streams are running - Ethernet handles it much better in our case.
> 
> We also don't have to constantly reboot the DVR's to keep them connected.
> 
> Glad you took the time to run the test. So many hear just read what D* or the high posters print and take it as gospel.


Just to let you know, wavemaster, there have been several different solutions for people with the same symptoms as you. One person (who had previously changed a router setting which fixed his problem) recreated the problem under the new software. The problem did not happen.

Just wanted to let you know that your experience with DECA may already be out of date. The problems that you experienced, may no longer be an issue.


----------



## Tom_S (Apr 9, 2002)

wavemaster said:


> When we see the big dif is when 5 streams are running - Ethernet handles it much better in our case.
> 
> We also don't have to constantly reboot the DVR's to keep them connected.
> 
> Glad you took the time to run the test. So many hear just read what D* or the high posters print and take it as gospel.


I was hard-wired. But when I added another receiver I was out of ports. Since I had to change my LNB due to problems I went whole-hog and did update to SWM and DECA.

The performance between the two in my setup has been identical. But now I have three receivers and only on port on my switch being used up. Win-win for me.


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

I had my HR20 and HR23 in the same cabinet for use on the LR HDTV. When On Demand was started I hardwired them to my DSL wireless modem which has a 4 port switch. Now forward to MRV beta. It just worked fine. I have since moved the HR20 to the BR where I already had an ethernet connection. Still works fine, and unless something changes I have no plan to go to DECA. 

My dish is a Slimline with 5LNB (non-SWM). I may go to SWM to cut the number of coax to each receiver in half. And then may go DECA.

The DSL modem is the Speedstream 6520.


----------

