Help with Moca backhaul - newbie

[whodiini]

I am attempting to establish a Moca backhaul from my Netgear RBR50 to my two RBS50 satellites that I use as wireless AP. Attached is a wiring diagram that I wonder will work. (config 1) The Moca just connects to each router and satellite without a switch or network. Since the netgear says that I can just connect the router and satellites together via an ethernet cable in a star config, without a switch, I think it may. (https://kb.netgear.com/000051205/Wh...and-how-do-I-set-it-up-on-my-Orbi-WiFi-System) I dont know if the RBR50 assigns an IP address to the MOCA backhaul ethernet through the WAN connection.

The next question is if I connect the Moca network to my router, will that work? (second attached file, config 2) The router will assign a network address to each moca unit and now the backhaul will have a network.

The next question is if I want to connect a device on the RBR50's switch, will it work with config 1 or do I need config 2? In config 1, there is no network for the backhaul, I think.

Thanks. I am getting confused between the Moca issues and the netgear RBR50 issues.

 

[krkaufman]

First thought is that you seem to only require the cable signal for the cable modem, and you have sufficient coax paths for the ISP/modem feed to be physically isolated from the MoCA-infused coax; so I’d suggest reconsidering the current coax topology, possibly eliminating the amp (powered splitter) and definitely using a separate MoCA-optimized splitter for interconnecting the MoCA nodes.

Related:

• MoCA topology choices:
  • MoCA AP+client vs dedicated pairs
  • splitter input-fed vs all outputs

• MoCA-compatible splitter recommendations (… and warnings)
• preferred MoCA filter: PPC GLP-1G70CWWS (Amazon US listing) … 70+ dB stop-band attenuation, spec’d for full MoCA Ext. Band D range, 1125-1675 MHz

 

[whodiini]

Yes, of course! The splitter amp was there when I had cable TV and never removed it when I canceled cable TV. But since I dont have cable TV any more, its no longer needed. So do u recommend 1b or 2b (attached)

 

[krkaufman]

As for how to link the adapters and mesh nodes via Ethernet, Config 1 seems OK, provided all the mesh nodes are configured as APs only. Config 2 would be OK were you to remove the redundant link between the switch and main mesh node (and configure all the mesh nodes as APs).

That said, I don’t know if the Orbi’s have a topology requirement similar to eero’s, requiring all satellites to feed via a primary node. (eero’s would require Config 1, but also all configured as APs only)

 

[whodiini]

Taking config 1b, with the moca splitter - I looked at your recommended moca splitters and not sure how to hook it up. The moca splitters have 1 in and X out. In config 1b, all three legs seem equal, so not sure which one should connect to the "in" on the splitter.

On config 2b - the netgear main unit has one wan port and multiple LAN ports. So it seems the WAN port connects to the router and the LAN port connects to the Moca backhaul, so it isnt redundant. The satellites only have LAN ports to connect to the moca backhaul. That said, I do not know if the netgear main node passes the IP address from the router to the LAN. If it does, then I dont need the moca to the router as it is redundant.

 

[krkaufman]

so not sure which one should connect to the "in" on the splitter.

up to you. See the topology options linked earlier.

Config 1’s seem simpler; though the main mesh node could connect direct to the router if that were preferable.

 

[whodiini]

now I am confused. Config 1b seems the simplest. But I am at a loss how to connect the splitter. All the topology examples linked looked like my original config 1 where the input coax was split along with the Moca. Per your suggestion, I did config 1b and removed the splitter and broke the connection between the input coax and the mocas, whereas all the topologies you linked had them connected thru splitters. Attached is a diagram of config 1b - maybe this clarifies my question.

 

[degrub]

That layout 1b will work for the moca side. Just add a moca POE filter on the input to the moca splitter to help the signal quality. Otherwise cap with a 75 ohm cap. Make sure your moca splitter is certified moca 2

 

[whodiini]

Thank you. I was reading somewhere that the speeds between the output to Moca on a splitter are slower than from input to output. If so, should the moca from the main mesh unit be connected to the input to the splitter? Also you mentioned that a POE filter should be added to the input on the splitter. Since the Mocas cabling are isolated from anywhere else, why is a POE filter needed?

 

[whodiini]

well it turns out that one of my potential moca connections is in a very inconvenient place that will take a while to get to (requires lots of bookcases movement to get to the cable outlet.) So I need to do something in the meanwhile at that location. Attached are 1d and 1e options to bypass the use of cable for one satellite. Not sure which one will work 1e seems like it would, 1d isnt clear how the backhaul to the one satellite would function. Thanks for everyone's help!

 

[degrub]

Thank you. I was reading somewhere that the speeds between the output to Moca on a splitter are slower than from input to output. If so, should the moca from the main mesh unit be connected to the input to the splitter? Also you mentioned that a POE filter should be added to the input on the splitter. Since the Mocas cabling are isolated from anywhere else, why is a POE filter needed?

from my previous reply
"
moca POE filter on the input to the moca splitter to help the signal quality
"

 

[whodiini]

OK. So I tried a bunch of stuff. Attached is my final (current) config. The netgear mesh shows that the backhaul is using the wired backhaul, not wifi.

What I discovered is that even though the moca network has no direct connection to my router all the satellites AND the hardware attached via ethernet to the satellites have IP addresses assigned in network A. Working great! Thanks to everyone for the help.

 

[degrub]

yes, MOCA is just a fancy ethernet cable ;-)

 

[krkaufman]

now I am confused. Config 1b seems the simplest.

Apologies. When I said …

Config 1’s seem simpler;

… that’s “Config 1’s, plural, seem (not seems) simpler” … intended to communicate that in each pair of diagrams presented, the “Config 1*” versions were simpler relative to their Config 2* variants.

But I am at a loss how to connect the splitter. All the topology examples linked looked like my original config 1 … all the topologies you linked had them connected thru splitters.

Have you reviewed the competing topologies in the linked “splitter input-fed vs all outputs” comment? Your Config 1b follows the “all outputs” example, though it would fully map to my preferred approach if the now-unnecessary MoCA filter between the point-of-entry and the modem were moved to the MoCA splitter’s input port and capped with a 75-ohm terminator — as suggested by degrub.

I was reading somewhere that the speeds between the output to Moca on a splitter are slower than from input to output. If so, should the moca from the main mesh unit be connected to the input to the splitter? Also you mentioned that a POE filter should be added to the input on the splitter. Since the Mocas cabling are isolated from anywhere else, why is a POE filter needed?

Also covered in the linked “splitter input-fed vs all outputs” comment.

 

[krkaufman]

Attached is my final (current) config.

Looks fine, opting for the “input-fed” topology rather than “all outputs,” and hopefully implemented using a 2-way splitter, as pictured.

Caveats:

• The MoCA filter between the point-of-entry and modem isn’t strictly needed, but may still be of benefit near-term until if/when the cable service requires use of DOCSIS 3.1+ signals above 1002 MHz.
• The MoCA 2.0 nodes may limit throughput over the wired backhaul to 800 Mbps max.

 

[whodiini]

Thank you for the clarifications on the different splitter toplogies. It really helped me understand what options you were communicating. From what I read, putting a POE filter along with a termination at the splitter input helps with reflections. But what about the comment that the input communicates at 2x the speed to the outputs vs 1x the speed between outputs?

I understand that the Moca 2.0 nodes may limit the speed of the backhaul. I am planning to replace the 2.0 nodes with 2.5 nodes and also replace the 1Gbit switches with managed 2.5 switches. (managed, to future proof the ability to run VLANs). The router already has 2.5Gbps ports. The ethernet wiring in the house even though is only CAT5, passes 2.5 Gbps, as tested with iperf3. So soon, everything will be upgraded to 2.5Gbps in the house. Thats quite an improvement as the wiring had been running 100baseT until yesterday.

 

[krkaufman]

But what about the comment that the input communicates at 2x the speed to the outputs vs 1x the speed between outputs?

Lacking any citation I was hoping we could just skip that, forget it was ever uttered, because I have no clue what it’s supposed to mean.

The linked comments offer explanations and a walk-through on the reflective benefit of a “PoE” MoCA filter; but, as stated, it’s not as critical in simpler setups.

 

[whodiini]

I read the Moca brochure and it helped me understand a bit more. Putting the POE filter at the splitter input acts as a mirror for the signal and effectively doubles the signal strength. For just 3 coax, it probably doesnt matter - I happened to have a moca 2.5 splitter 1 input 2 outputs, so thats the real reason I used it that way. Otherwise I have to get a 1 input 3 output splitter. In thinking about the post that said that the speed was 2x from input to output, I agree, it doesnt make any sense.