Discussion about MoCA 2.5 adapter with 2.5GbE Ethernet port

[gocoax]

We found many people asking for the MoCA 2.5 adapter with 2.5Gbps Ethernet port. Perhaps it is because MoCA2.5 emphasizes that it can support 2.5Gbps bandwidth.
Today let me do more introduction about the MoCA bandwidth, and try to find out can we benefit from 2.5GbE Ethernet port.
1, MoCA bandwidth is shared by TDM.
Because coaxial cable only has one circuit, so MoCA is not a full-duplex system. it is a help-duplex system. If one node talks to another one node, the others must wait. The bandwidth is allocated by TDM mode.
2, MoCA bandwidth is shared by all the MoCA devices in the same network.
All the MoCA devices are connected to the same coaxial network, so they share the total MoCA bandwidth, about 2.5Gbps for MoCA 2.5. For example, there are 4 nodes in the same network, suppose all them have 2.5GbE port. if A to B is using 1Gbps bandwidth, then C to D only can use 1.5Gbps bandwidth.
3, Not all the packet length can get 2.5Gbps
Only large packets the length is more than 1000Bytes can get 2.5Gbps. the small packets get a much lower bandwidth, for example, 64Bytes packet only get about 250Mbps. The longer packet size, the higher bandwidth. Don't worry, for most Internet service, such as web suffering, watching video and gaming, we are using large packets only.
4, In fact, MoCA 2.5 can achieve about 3Gbps bandwidth.
If you can test the MoCA 2.5 adapters with professional test equipment, you can find with packet size over 1280 bytes, you can get more 3Gbps bandwidth.
I attached our report for your reference.

Any discussion is welcome.

 

[krkaufman]

try to find out can we benefit from 2.5GbE Ethernet port.

At a minimum, having MoCA 2.5 adapters with a 2.5GbE port would be beneficial to those setups requiring a repeater configuration, ensuring the throughput between two MoCA 2.5 segments wouldn’t be throttled by their Ethernet connection.

example (borrowing from the “MoCA best practices” document):

 

[krkaufman]

Oh, the goCoax MA2500D adapter is now available for purchase, at $75 per:

• https://www.gocoax.com/product-page/ma2500d
• https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08XP8MMFG/

 

[Samir]

I'm glad to see that 2.5Gbe phy hardware and demand has increased to the point a product with a 2.5Gb port is viable. For a point to point link where moca is being used, this more than doubles the amount of available bandwidth, which will vastly increases the potential speeds for such a link.

I have noticed that gocoax has some competition in the 2.5Gbps moca adapter space after being the only retail one available--specifically from translite and actiontec. How is your product superior to theirs, and what can we expect for the next evolution of Moca?

 

[gocoax]

I'm glad to see that 2.5Gbe phy hardware and demand has increased to the point a product with a 2.5Gb port is viable. For a point to point link where moca is being used, this more than doubles the amount of available bandwidth, which will vastly increases the potential speeds for such a link.

I have noticed that gocoax has some competition in the 2.5Gbps moca adapter space after being the only retail one available--specifically from translite and actiontec. How is your product superior to theirs, and what can we expect for the next evolution of Moca?

We will try our best to provide more cost-effective products to the customer and we will provide best customer support.

 

[Samir]

We will try our best to provide more cost-effective products to the customer and we will provide best customer support.

It always good to see companies reach out to where the customer is, like here.

You mentioned the gocoax 2.5 moca products in theory can even hit 3Gbps of bandwidth. Do you think the other brands will work in a similar manner?

 

[krkaufman]

Oh, the goCoax MA2500D adapter is now available for purchase, at $75 per:

• https://www.gocoax.com/product-page/ma2500d
• https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08XP8MMFG/

Heh, there’s more competition on this front than I was aware of...

MoCA 2.5 adapters w/ 2.5 GbE ports:
* Actiontec ECB7250
* goCoax MA2500D
* Kiwee Broadband KB-M3-01
* Motorola MM1025
* Translite TL-MC85

 

[Samir]

After so many years of moca basically being forgotten, the number of products available really show that it may be poised for a real comeback. Translite even has a commercial model that can support up to 31 adapters--much higher than I thought what was normally possible previously.

 

[jrmtz85]

Hi there,

I have some Translite TL-MC84s, and have a question about IP addresses. What's better practice:

1) Letting the adapters use their default 192.168.144.200 address?
2) Giving them a fixed address within your LAN (ex 192.168.10)?

Not sure if there's a drawback to option 2 or some sort of benefit to option 1?

Thanks!

 

[degrub]

1) obscurity
2) easy access on your lan

 

[jrmtz85]

1) obscurity
2) easy access on your lan

Does 1) matter much if my house cable is disconnected from the outside world?

For 2), any drawbacks or performance impact to switching over to LAN address? Been having some issues with mine, and I figure easy LAN access would simplify troubleshooting.

 

[degrub]

No, but if your lan is connected to the WAN, then anything that gets in from either side (local wireless or something that compromises a local PC, for example) theoretically, would have access. To what end - probably no issues.
No

 

[Samir]

Hi there,

I have some Translite TL-MC84s, and have a question about IP addresses. What's better practice:

1) Letting the adapters use their default 192.168.144.200 address?
2) Giving them a fixed address within your LAN (ex 192.168.10)?

Not sure if there's a drawback to option 2 or some sort of benefit to option 1?

Thanks!

Benefit to 1 is that it's hard for anything on the network to have access to them without a static IP in that proper range. Plus, if multiple units have the same address, one has to physically disconnect the others to access a single unit. So some security through just the hoops to jump through.

Benefit to 2 is that you can access it directly on your network. The drawback is that so can anything else that gets on your network. So if some malware gets on your network it can attempt to attack them, although the best malware would go into the deeper layers of ethernet where any physical connect to the network would make them vulnerable.

Personally, I would leave them at 1 unless you had a need to move them to 2. And then if the use on 2 is limited (like the diag you mentioned), I would move them back to 1 or some address 'off network' so that they cannot be easily accessed again.

 

[Mark070]

Since discovering MoCA (using both the ActionTek and the GoCOAX adapters), this has been a huge saving for me. I don't have to spend the money to tear my townhome apart running wires. I have four adapters in my house - each to a separate room, with a switch in each room to extend the network.

The only issue I have is once in a while I have to pull the plug on one of the GoCOAX adapters (in the computer room) to get it back to maximum speed - otherwise it gets locked in at 3-4 MB/s instead of the full 90+ MB/s. I only need to do this about once a month.

I understand the technology is half-duplex, but, what is stopping it from being full duplex? Is it the physical cable the signal runs over? I do not buy the 2.5 ethernet port version - as I would only buy that if I knew I had a single 1:1 run without other rooms needing a signal.

Overall, works great for my needs, acts as the backbone network to the house (including the Wifi Access Points down stairs)

 

[Samir]

I would reach out to gocoax about the reset issue. This might be resolved with a firmware update.

As far as duplex, I think it is because it works in a shared medium. But with almost 3Gbps of bandwidth available even 2x full 1Gb streams will not run into a reduction in speed, which is nice. And this is just with moca 2.5. The roadmap for moca is to push it higher, so the advancement of the tech will hopefully eclipse any needs for full-duplex (on the moca side anyways).

 

[Waltski]

Since discovering MoCA (using both the ActionTek and the GoCOAX adapters), this has been a huge saving for me. I don't have to spend the money to tear my townhome apart running wires. I have four adapters in my house - each to a separate room, with a switch in each room to extend the network.

The only issue I have is once in a while I have to pull the plug on one of the GoCOAX adapters (in the computer room) to get it back to maximum speed - otherwise it gets locked in at 3-4 MB/s instead of the full 90+ MB/s. I only need to do this about once a month.

I understand the technology is half-duplex, but, what is stopping it from being full duplex? Is it the physical cable the signal runs over? I do not buy the 2.5 ethernet port version - as I would only buy that if I knew I had a single 1:1 run without other rooms needing a signal.

Overall, works great for my needs, acts as the backbone network to the house (including the Wifi Access Points down stairs)

Coaxial cable has an inner and outer core that share a geometric axis, compared to Ethernet cable which has 8 separate lines for data transmission. Ethernet cable can do full duplex because it can send transmit and receive data simultaneously using different lines. Because coax has only one line, it can never do full duplex; however, using MoCA technology, you can send and receive data near-simultaneously over a single data line.

MoCA uses the same technology that cell phone carriers use to send/receive data, using orthogonal frequency division modulation (OFDM) subcarriers that are adaptive-modulated by various modulation schemes. The medium access control (MAC) layer for MoCA uses a distributed mesh network architecture with time division multiple access (TDMA) for scheduled access, just like cell phone technology.

Although it is half-duplex, MoCA can provide near-equivalent speeds to Ethernet. Ethernet will always be faster those instances where you are uploading and downloading data at the same time, but MoCA gets pretty close.

 

[degrub]

"Ethernet" was initially implemented on coax as well. Only one transmitter at a time otherwise collision and everyone start over. Thick yellow coax with "vampire taps" to make branch connections. What a pain. Of course TDRs helped troubleshooting immensely if you could get your hands on one. Otherwise it was hunting for cat's whiskers . Then there was "thin" cable, and then what everyone is familiar with today. Installed and repaired plenty of it in the '70s and '80s. Much easier with today's version and simple termination.

So MOCA is just going back to Ethernet's roots.

 

[Samir]

"Ethernet" was initially implemented on coax as well. Only one transmitter at a time otherwise collision and everyone start over. Thick yellow coax with "vampire taps" to make branch connections. What a pain. Of course TDRs helped troubleshooting immensely if you could get your hands on one. Otherwise it was hunting for cat's whiskers . Then there was "thin" cable, and then what everyone is familiar with today. Installed and repaired plenty of it in the '70s and '80s. Much easier with today's version and simple termination.

So MOCA is just going back to Ethernet's roots.

Yep, and that's why it is interesting that there weren't more 10Mb 'coax' based IP cameras when the move from analog to digital cameras came about. Even today, only 2k and above cameras break the 10Mb barrier. I'm kinda surprised that moca with poe hasn't come along as a solution for IPcameras that could reuse existing coax. There was a huge gap for this in situations where not ripping out all the old wiring and just spending a little more on the cameras would have worked.