1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

DECA vs Ethernet

Discussion in 'DIRECTV Connected Home' started by pjschwartz, Nov 7, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Nov 7, 2011 #21 of 116
    DarkLogix

    DarkLogix Godfather

    322
    0
    Oct 20, 2011
    Ya I just hope that D* planned for it when they built the HR34 as if not then the Deca to eth link via a HR34 might be sub-par but then it might be better than the CCK (any word on the HR34's eth port speed? I guess its likely only 100)
     
  2. Nov 7, 2011 #22 of 116
    Sixto

    Sixto Well-Known Member

    12,224
    94
    Nov 18, 2005
    100Mbps.
     
  3. Nov 7, 2011 #23 of 116
    DarkLogix

    DarkLogix Godfather

    322
    0
    Oct 20, 2011
    argg why couldn't they get with it and put in a gig link
    with Deca being over 200Mbps a gig link should allow for faster access and lower latency (although then ethernet would have something noticeable over deca)
     
  4. Nov 7, 2011 #24 of 116
    Stuart Sweet

    Stuart Sweet The Shadow Knows!

    37,060
    287
    Jun 18, 2006
    That is not, will not, cannot, etc. be the plan. I understand what you're saying but please move on.
     
  5. Nov 7, 2011 #25 of 116
    pjschwartz

    pjschwartz AllStar

    95
    0
    Jul 13, 2007
    So is the "latency" issue (when issuing DVR commands . . . FF, pause, etc) eliminated with DECA?
     
  6. Nov 7, 2011 #26 of 116
    DarkLogix

    DarkLogix Godfather

    322
    0
    Oct 20, 2011
    From what I've read a good eth network doesn't have latency issues with MVR and nether does deca
     
  7. Nov 7, 2011 #27 of 116
    veryoldschool

    veryoldschool Lifetime Achiever Staff Member Super Moderator DBSTalk Club

    42,679
    348
    Dec 9, 2006
    I don't have those problems, but there are times starting a recording, that I'm waiting [too long], which I think is more due to the DVR being "busy".
     
  8. Nov 7, 2011 #28 of 116
    lugnutathome

    lugnutathome Hall Of Fame

    3,003
    108
    Apr 13, 2009
    Woodburn, OR
    I've heard yes and no to that question but having 11 receivers on some LOOOONG runs (nearly 200ft in one case), I see latency as being relative to the distances between the client server pairing. Closer (in line feet) boxes are more "localized" in the responses whereas the longer line units seem slower and a more predictable back run so you don't miss programming using visual "oh it's on now" cues and response times.

    My workout room "Bat Cave" HR24-500 is 191 feet from the Ethernet backbone switch and my master bedroom's "Sleepy Hollow" HR23-700 145. Physically these units are about 50 feet apart.

    I have several H25s on DECA bridged via an "ICK" so to be fair all my servers use the Ethernet backbone so I cannot say for certain DECA would improve things. But from a viewer's perspective the two infrastructures are transparent to one another in my implementation.

    If what you have works changing things out might not be anything you would note as being different. OTOH, having single lines to a DVR does allow DVR placement in rooms that prior could only use a standard receiver.

    SWM also has AGC (Automatic Gain Control) so is a bit less weather affected.

    Converting to DECA and having VOD requires a few of "stems and pieces" (if you've the older non internal DECA equipment) and another wall wart for your Internet connectivity.

    But it does get you "support", frees up your existing LAN for downloading the newest:dance01: Lady Gaga stuff, and is conceptually "future proof". But given RVU and it's standards are for Ethernet, I'm thinking a well oiled LAN is perfectly serviceable too. But as the receivers evolve that Ethernet port may go the way of the Dodo.

    Then again non WWDVR subscribers still may need VOD so for the DVR's it is conceivable that the Ethernet port may in fact remain.

    It's anybodies guess.

    Don "unless you need to add receivers or get support, you may be just fine as you are" Bolton
     
  9. Nov 7, 2011 #29 of 116
    poppo

    poppo Hall Of Fame

    1,938
    11
    Oct 10, 2006
    With a Ethernet switch, it's not on your LAN any more than DECA is.

    I fail to see how it frees up your LAN for downloading. The data still has to come through your router, and as noted above, with a switch it doesn't use any LAN BW other than what comes though the router just like DECA.
     
  10. Nov 7, 2011 #30 of 116
    dennisj00

    dennisj00 Hall Of Fame

    9,679
    191
    Sep 27, 2007
    Lake Norman, NC
    I think what everyone is saying - or mostly everyone - is that MRV traffic stays on the DECA cloud. VOD and the other miscellaneous traffic - TVApps, etc. - does have to get back to your router and then the internet.

    A well designed LAN can do the same thing. But how many joe customers have a well designed home LAN.

    And Directv installers know coax connectors, not rj45s.
     
  11. Nov 7, 2011 #31 of 116
    lugnutathome

    lugnutathome Hall Of Fame

    3,003
    108
    Apr 13, 2009
    Woodburn, OR
    Just a humorous tone about a possible positive side effect of having the DECA "subnet" running mainly isolated from your primary network except for VOD or Utoob traffic that has to bubble out through the router.

    Reality is a well implemented LAN is just fine even a mere 10/100 one.

    In the case of the OP they have a suitable infrastructure in place and no immediate need to change.

    Don "just tryin to interject some levity into what has been a touchy subject in the past" Bolton
     
  12. Nov 7, 2011 #32 of 116
    poppo

    poppo Hall Of Fame

    1,938
    11
    Oct 10, 2006
    Well designed? :confused: Connect equipment to switch - done. How hard is that? As long as all receivers are connected to the same switch, it is no different then the 'DECA cloud'.
     
  13. Nov 7, 2011 #33 of 116
    lugnutathome

    lugnutathome Hall Of Fame

    3,003
    108
    Apr 13, 2009
    Woodburn, OR
    Actually it is different (Ethernet) in that it is SWM independent and scales out to allow more devices over greater physical distances than DECA was engineered for. In normal home installations they would operate identically however (from a viewers perspective).

    As to well designed and the simple explanation you offer, the average "Joe" can conceivably find ways to stack switches off switches and make internal switch routing confined to one or 2 ports on the main backbone and that could get f'ugly.

    But yeah if everything goes through a good quality centralized backbone switch each client has a private line to its server whereas DECA has a "party line" which uses "channels" to permit a single client to connect to a single server in amidst the swirl of all the traffic.

    In the broad sense DECA is more limited but it's limits were designed to function in nearly all of their residential base installations and it simplifies Direct TVs management, and maintenance of the service.

    So while it might not scale to MDU "sized" installations it has a great sweet spot for the vast majority of subscribers.

    Don "how did that horse get back in here?" Bolton
     
  14. Nov 7, 2011 #34 of 116
    poppo

    poppo Hall Of Fame

    1,938
    11
    Oct 10, 2006
    I just don't see anything complicated about using Ethernet with zero impact on the LAN until it comes to Internet traffic or other traffic that goes though the router (i.e. nomad to iPad via wireless). And that will be the same if using DECA. I'm sitting here looking at my switch passing MRV traffic between 2 switch ports while I stream a movie from my server to my TV via two other ports. For all practical purposes, they are on separate networks as far as LAN traffic is concerned. This is not rocket science.

    Of course for someone that does not already have network cable in place, DECA is the way to go. But there is absolutely no issue concerning LAN traffic using Ethernet. If anyone has a complicated enough LAN that requires multiple switches, etc., the odds are they have the smarts to do it right (or have paid someone to set it up).
     
  15. Nov 7, 2011 #35 of 116
    dennisj00

    dennisj00 Hall Of Fame

    9,679
    191
    Sep 27, 2007
    Lake Norman, NC
    Maybe 'Well designed' should be replaced by 'poorly implemented'. . .

    Read thread after thread of 'my ipad won't find my dvr . . .' or 'my dvr drops off the network' of why does this dvr have a 192.168.2.x address and this one has a 192.168.1.x address . . .

    Some people think one router is good, two must be better!

    Another reason they have 'supported' vs. non-supported'. Armed with only a coax tool, the DECA dvrs will find each other until thrown into the poorly implemented local LAN!

    I visited a friend a few months ago that paid to have his network setup -- he is an engineer by trade and you would think might know better?? I believe quoting you 'the odds are they have the smarts to do it right (or have paid someone to set it up)'.

    So he should have the smarts or paid (drum roll here. . )the GEEK squad. . .

    His wireless was using his neighbors router! And he had paid the GEEK squad!!
     
  16. Nov 8, 2011 #36 of 116
    DarkLogix

    DarkLogix Godfather

    322
    0
    Oct 20, 2011
    I know you put subnet in quotes but still from a network perspective subnet is not applicable here (a subnet mask when binary ANDed with an ip address results in the network ID which looks like an IP but its not a usable IP address when that mask is used but it defines the network)

    sorry I just don't like it when people use subnet or vlan wrong, it comes from actually using VLSM to make differant size subnets applied to vlans
     
  17. Nov 8, 2011 #37 of 116
    lugnutathome

    lugnutathome Hall Of Fame

    3,003
    108
    Apr 13, 2009
    Woodburn, OR
    No problem. I'm a DBA not a network guy. I know just enough to do what I need to here at home. At work I use the networking group.

    Don "so how does that new hair net thingamabob connect up anyhow?" Bolton
     
  18. Nov 8, 2011 #38 of 116
    DarkLogix

    DarkLogix Godfather

    322
    0
    Oct 20, 2011
    No worries I'm horrible with DB's (Sure I can manage but DB's aren't my strong suit) I know alot of the concepts but its the fine details of DB's that I don't
     
  19. Nov 8, 2011 #39 of 116
    lugnutathome

    lugnutathome Hall Of Fame

    3,003
    108
    Apr 13, 2009
    Woodburn, OR
    I wouldn't call the details "fine";) More like obstacles and traps:grin:

    Don "knot rely and Eye Tee perfeshinal eye jest plaa won at werk" Bolton
     
  20. Nov 8, 2011 #40 of 116
    gio12

    gio12 Icon

    886
    3
    Jul 31, 2006
    No. I matter of fact, I say the same if not better performance using a wireless connection for MRV. I played the CSR roulette for weeks to get DECA installed, hoping for better performance. Nope. Almost a waste of my time and D* time/money. Luckily it was FREE!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page