|Topic Review (Newest First)|
|2014-06-01 11:37 AM|
I'm curious to learn how your network is set up? 40MB/s is unusually lousy for MoCA. Are you sure
you've wired everything the right way?
With most MoCA adapters, the manufacturer includes a PC-based app which allows you to configure your MoCA adapter settings.
That includes an option for configuring the channel (frequency range) on which you want the device to be operating. This helps to prevent clashes between MoCA gear and other types of gear, which might have issues sharing the (Cable) medium with MoCA.
MoCA 1.0 and 1.1 Freq. range: 860 to 1600MHz (1.6GHz)
Moca 2.0 Freq. range: 860 to 1675 MHz (extended slightly over 1.1)
and added channels in the 500 MHz -600 MHz range, to be used by satellite operators
So with MoCA 1.0 and 1.1, cable TV, Over the Air, most digital equipment, there should be no interference issues.
If you have satellite, you're going to want to use MoCA 2.0, if possible.
BTW, it's also a really good idea if you ask me, to put a POE (point of entry) filter, usually at the demarc
in your network. It prevents signals from neighbouring cable or satellite gear from coming in to your home and prevents your signals from going out to someone else's equipment.
SOURCES: Moca manufacturer presentations and FAQs
|2014-04-28 01:00 AM|
|Wayne||I haven't seen much about HPNA in recent years - I still have a Linksys HPNA router - it looks just like the WRT54G but it was HPNA 2.0 rather than Wifi. It could handle a whopping 10Mbps!|
|2014-04-23 05:38 PM|
|2014-04-23 05:24 PM|
|buzzinhornets||yeah... I thought I read something about HPNA... so that's like MoCA but a different flavour right? do you know exactly what fequencies it uses?|
|2014-04-22 12:11 AM|
|yyzlhr||MoCA runs in the 1ghz and above frequencies. HPNA uses lower frequencies so they should be able to coexist.|
|2014-04-21 05:43 PM|
|Dr.Dave||I think Bell uses wireless receivers for its new Fibe TV installations. Only the main PVR has to be hard-wired (either Cat5 Ethernet or coax) and can be attached to any TV. Depending on your situation, you may not have to overlap with the MoCA setup.|
|2014-04-21 03:54 PM|
|buzzinhornets||Hey, so my MoCA setup works great... but I'm with Rogers. If I switch to Bell Fibe TV would I run into any issues? i.e. I think I read that MoCA doesn't work well with Satellite TV since they share the same MHz/GHz... what about Fibe TV?|
|2014-03-31 06:28 PM|
I am also using MoCA. 5-6 years ago I bought three Motorola NIM-100 adapters on eBay for about $90. I use them to bridge an area where I have ethernet (and cable) to two other rooms where I couldn't easily run ethernet but I do have cable outlets. I also tried powerline but didn't get very good speeds. When I ran a PC to test my transfer speeds with MoCA I was getting about 40 Mbps - which is plenty good for HD video.
Eventually, when I do get around to renovating this part of the house, I will run ethernet but for now this is good enough. I guess the other option would be to move to Wifi since the newer wifi standards seem to be faster and more reliable than the Wireless G standard that was prevalent at the time that I started using my MoCA adapters.
|2014-03-28 09:06 AM|
|wysiwyg||I'm using a pair of ActionTec MoCA adaptors along with with my my Rogers Services (Cable + Internet) and they work great. Much better than all the Powerline adaptors I tried. It doesn't like the Rogers Whole Home service though, so if you have that, it needs to be deactivated first. Also, the recent Rogers receivers (4250, Nextbox 2, 3...) are suppose to be MoCa compatible, yet they don't seem to work with my ActionTec (I was told it uses the same standard when I visited their booth at CES in 2012 and they showed them side by side with SA boxes)|
|2014-03-28 12:14 AM|
There's a few reasons why more companies don't sell this technology.
The main advantage to using MoCA is the simplicity of the setup and ability to reach remote devices (outside of your Ethernet/wifi range). However, MoCA is mostly proprietary to cable provider equipment, whereas HomePlug (powerline networking) is readily available through a number of vendors and retail devices. Finally, in terms of speed, networking through MoCA is much slower than either gigabit Ethernet or a good Wi-Fi connection using wireless N or AC.
The proprietary nature of MoCA means that if you switch providers, you need to switch networking equipment. Slower speeds (compared to CAT5e or WiFi) means that you're unlikely to use MoCA unless necessary. And HomePlug probably does a better job at connecting distant devices, since a room is more likely to be wired with power outlets than cable. And lack of retail (non-ISP) products limits the usefulness of the technology.
Note that the same arguments apply to HomePNA phoneline networking offered through DSL providers.
|2014-03-27 01:29 PM|
|buzzinhornets||Just want to say that these Moca adapters met/surpassed my expectations! my 1005Mhz splitters were no issue and I installed 4 of these in about 15 minutes. The only additional step I had to take was buy two diplexers from Lowes to split the Moca signals around a cable tv amplifier that rogers installed... the diplexers allow the cable tv mhz to be amplified, and the moca mhz bypass the amplifier. Everything working great now - tv, moca ethernet, even allowed me to add some access points to the moca ends! very pleased - not sure why more companies don't sell this technology???????|
|2014-02-14 01:02 AM|
|gzink||2.4 are for satellite like shaw direct cable runs. I'm not sure that you need 2.4 for reg cable and internet but the higher rated can't do any harm.|
|2014-02-13 11:34 PM|
|four||Yes, that is what I meant, sorry...|
|2014-02-13 10:26 PM|
|buzzinhornets||Huh? R u not confusing this with wifi 2.4ghz? I'm talking coax splitters rated at 2.4ghz|
|2014-02-13 09:02 PM|
The higher the freq - the shorter the range (same power, environment variables, etc.)
Hence, switching from 5GHz to 2.4GHz will improve range. But the latter is a "busier" freq - microwaves, cordless phones, etc.
|This thread has more than 15 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.|