Questions on my GoCoax 2.5 Adapter Install

[unioncorps]

Hi everyone,

Sorry for the long post in advance

I've finally pulled the trigger and went ahead and installed my 3 GoCoax 2.5 adapters in my home. I have been debating back and forth about running ethernet cables from my mesh router to other areas of the house, but ended up going with the next best thing. My plan for using MocA really was to add a wired backhaul to my 2 mesh Orbi satellites to provide stable and relatively consistent Wi-Fi speeds throughout the house.

DISCLAIMER: For those that don't know, the Orbi mesh system is a triband router that uses a wireless 5Ghz backhaul to communicate with each other - I do know that even though by enabling a wired backhaul for mesh communication, I won't be able to actually use this 'freed up' bandwidth for Wi-Fi. The reasoning behind me continuing to move forward with using MocA in this case is to see if it truly made a difference in Wi-Fi output speeds from the Orbi nodes using a wired backhaul vs. wireless.

For reference, I attached a schematic of how I wired everything, based on what I've read and understood to be correct and below is some more information for context:

• Home Size: 3700 sq ft
• Internet Provider/Plan: Xfinity 800/20 Mbps (no TV, internet only)
• Cable Modem: Netgear CM1000 (DOCSIS 3.1)
• Mesh Router: Netgear Orbi RBK750 (1 Router, 2 Satellites)

Here are average speed results after MoCA install and setup, testing using my laptop and Speed Test app:

• Guest bedroom satellite, connected via ethernet cable: 850-915 Mbps down / 22-23 Mbps up
• 5 ft away from Guest bedroom satellite, connected via Wi-Fi: 750-800 Mbps down / 22-23 Mbps up
• 15 ft away from Guest bedroom satellite, connected via Wi-Fi: 715-740 Mbps down / 22-23 Mbps up
• Living Room satellite, connected via ethernet cable: 850-915 Mbps down / 22-23 Mbps up
• 5 ft away from Living Room satellite, connected via Wi-Fi: 730-760 Mbps down / 22-23 up
• 15 ft away from Living Room satellite, connected via Wi-Fi: 700-720 Mbps down / 22-23 up

Speeds seem higher with MoCA installed, as compared with my Orbi's defaulting to wireless backhaul. For example, I remember getting 620-650 Mbps down when I was 15 ft away from the Living Room satellite.

In summary, everything is up and working to my knowledge. No disconnects, drops, or connectivity issues. That said I do have a few questions for you all:

1. Knowing that I have a DOCSIS 3.1 modem and that MoCA frequencies overlap some of the range, I did originally install an extra POE MoCA filter at the coax port of the cable modem. However, I think that seemed to do more harm than good - I couldn't even log into my cable modem to see signal levels/stats with the filter on. So, I removed it and I can access my cable modem again and as I mentioned, everything is back to normal. Is this something I need to worry about?
2. My original setup prior to the MoCA install had no splitters whatsoever in my coax lines. Since the install I have introduced 2 splitters (indicated in the schematic), which I think have raised my cable modem upstream power levels to around 50-51 dbmV. As I mentioned, I haven't experienced any disconnects, modem restarts, or connectivity issues since the install but I know that range is close to the max accepted tolerance levels for the modem. Is there any way of reducing the upstream power, knowing that I still need to have 2 splitters? I have seen some splitters that have a lower db loss that I could potentially switch out, but I'm not even sure if that'll make a difference to the upstream power levels. (I've seen a 2-way splitter that has a -3.7 db loss vs. the -4.5 db loss I have now installed).
3. I haven't logged into the GoCoax web interface yet - do I even need to or is there any particular settings I need to check off to ensure my MocA adapters are fully optimized based on my current setup? It seems even trying to access the interface is troublesome.
4. There's a MPS (MocA Protected Setup) button on my GoCoax adapters - is this something I need to turn on or necessary? I read in the instructions that by default it is off.

Thank you so much in advance for your input!

 

[unioncorps]

Bumping thread to see if anyone has answers to the questions in my original post.

 

[krkaufman]

1. Knowing that I have a DOCSIS 3.1 modem and that MoCA frequencies overlap some of the range, I did originally install an extra POE MoCA filter at the coax port of the cable modem. However, I think that seemed to do more harm than good - I couldn't even log into my cable modem to see signal levels/stats with the filter on. So, I removed it and I can access my cable modem again and as I mentioned, everything is back to normal. Is this something I need to worry about?

If things are working and stable then the modem doesn’t appear to be sensitive to MoCA signals and so wouldn’t require the additional “prophylactic” MoCA filter. That said, installing a working MoCA filter on the modem shouldn’t produce the symptoms described.

2. My original setup prior to the MoCA install had no splitters whatsoever in my coax lines. Since the install I have introduced 2 splitters (indicated in the schematic), which I think have raised my cable modem upstream power levels to around 50-51 dbmV. As I mentioned, I haven't experienced any disconnects, modem restarts, or connectivity issues since the install but I know that range is close to the max accepted tolerance levels for the modem. Is there any way of reducing the upstream power, knowing that I still need to have 2 splitters? I have seen some splitters that have a lower db loss that I could potentially switch out, but I'm not even sure if that'll make a difference to the upstream power levels. (I've seen a 2-way splitter that has a -3.7 db loss vs. the -4.5 db loss I have now installed).

One option addressing the modem signal level as well as future DOCSIS/MoCA signal conflicts would be relocation of the modem to where it can have a separate direct connection with the ISP, isolated from the MoCA coax. Or, as-is or as a prerequisite to relocation, running an additional coax line to one of the three Orbi device locations, enabling the separate isolated modem connection.

3. … I haven't logged into the GoCoax web interface yet - do I even need to

If they’re working, no.

4. There's a MPS (MocA Protected Setup) button on my GoCoax adapters - is this something I need to turn on or necessary?

With a “PoE” MoCA filter securing your network, not really. For the most paranoid, if the MoCA-infused coax extends into any publicly-accessible space, MoCA security could be used to ensure no foreign adapters could get connected.

 

[unioncorps]

One option addressing the modem signal level as well as future DOCSIS/MoCA signal conflicts would be relocation of the modem to where it can have a separate direct connection with the ISP, isolated from the MoCA coax. Or, as-is or as a prerequisite to relocation, running an additional coax line to one of the three Orbi device locations, enabling the separate isolated modem connection.

Thanks so much!! As far as the above, I'm curious on what your options would look like in a schematic diagram based on the setup I've provided.

AFAIK, Xfinity internet comes through a single cable in a closet on the first floor of my house. That's also where all of the coax lines lead to the respective rooms in the house (1st and 2nd floors) that have coax jacks. All of my networking stuff (ie. modem, Wi-Fi router) is in my office and my office has 1 coax port. I've already swapped the 2-way BAMF (5-2300 Mhz) splitter for another one with a -3.5 db loss and it really didn't help at all - instead, the upstream power levels increased by .5-.6 db so I'm at 50.5-51.5 dbmV across the upstream channels!

I've been looking at ways of potentially reducing a splitter somewhere in my current setup but I haven't been able to find another option that works, to reduce my modem upstream level power. My GoCoax adapaters only have 1 coax MoCA port, unlike the previous versions which had 2 with one of the ports I understand being a passive 'built-in splitter'.

 

[degrub]

The two ports on the moca modem pass different frequency ranges. The moca coax port accepts all frequencies up to the top moca band and also transmits moca signals out from the modem.
the other port is the output from an internal splitter off of the moca port. It only has TV frequencies for output. My recollection is that does not accept signals for input.

There was another case just like yours in the forum. If DOCCIS 3.1 or higher is implemented by the isp, the you have two options 1) run a second piece of coax from the common coax closet up to your office or2) have the ISP terminate their service in your office on a dedicated coax Home run to their pole ( not using any of the existing coax).
M
the second option is likely the cleanest.

both options will allow you to isolate your moca network from the DOCCIS network.

 

[krkaufman]

As far as the above, I'm curious on what your options would look like

AFAIK, Xfinity internet comes through a single cable in a closet on the first floor of my house. That's also where all of the coax lines lead to the respective rooms in the house

One option, then: Full relocation to closet: Modem, main router node and a 4th MoCA adapter could be installed in this closet, allowing the modem a direct, unfiltered and unsplit connection with the ISP -- improving signal strength and future-proofing for DOCSIS 3.1+.

The MoCA network would then be physically isolated, connecting the main closet adapter, Ethernet-linked to the router LAN, and the 3 remote coax locations — topology per your preference.

Don't love moving the router into a closet? OK...

Or, a second option, a slight tweak to the above, moving only the modem to the closet: Same as the above, except the router remains located as per the OP ... but using a pair of Frontier FCA252 MoCA 2.5 adapters (around $30 per on eBay) to effect the WAN link over the coax between the modem and router. Borrowing from a past post:

with the shared coax unused for any other purpose, a full speed dual MoCA 2.5 solution is possible using a pair of Frontier FCA252 MoCA 2.5 adapters for making the MoCA WAN connection, with the adapters set to their “25GW” configuration toggle position — which shifts their operating frequency to the non-standard range of 400-900 MHz. (see >this post< for a description of this "FCA252[25GW] MoCA WAN" approach)​

See also >this recent reply< to a parallel thread on SNB. As an example only, here's the scheme used in a fiber setup, where the only real difference is the "ONT" and "modem" labels, and the nature of the connection feeding the pictured "ONT."

​

​

​

Otherwise, option three is just running an additional coax or CATx line between the coax junction (the closet) and one of three current mesh node locations, in order to effect the ISP/modem isolation.

 

[krkaufman]

FYI...

My GoCoax adapaters only have 1 coax MoCA port, unlike the previous versions which had 2 with one of the ports I understand being a passive 'built-in splitter'.

Yes, the later 2.5 GbE goCoax MoCA 2.5 adapters (MA2500C & D) have just the single coax port, but the older WF-803M (w/ just a GigE network port) includes a RF pass-through coax port. But rather than a simple passive splitter, such MoCA adapters use an internal diplexer (dual filters) to surgically route the signals by frequency with less loss:

IN/OUT (5-1675 MHz) <==> TV/STB (5-1002 MHz) || Internal MoCA chip (1125-1675 MHz)

Notably, because of the 40+ dB stop-band (1125-1675 MHz) attenuation on the TV/STB port, the RF pass-through port mustn't be used for connecting any devices requiring MoCA connectivity.

p.s. It would have been nice had somebody produced a cable/MoCA diplexer some years back, similar to the antenna/satellite diplexers that proliferated for satellite setups. But then MoCA hardly has the market penetration of satellite. Alas.

 

[unioncorps]

@krkaufman - thank you so much!!! This is very helpful for me. I'll have to think through what setup may work best... Right now, even though I'm experiencing higher upstream power levels that I see on my cable modem, I haven't had any internet drops or disconnects yet. I've checked the outdoor cabling on the side of my house and everything looks in tact and connections are tight, with no obvious visible signs of damaged or kinked cabling.

Perhaps it's a wait and see... (I'm really hesitant to call Xfinity to check the connection from the tap to my house... they may inadvertently make things worse, which has happened before, while charging a diagnostic fee).

As far as having the newer version of the GoCoax adapters, that's a shame - I think it made sense having an RF pass-through that has lesser loss as compared to a regular cable splitter. Appreciate all your insight and wisdom!

 

[unioncorps]

@krkaufman - Thinking through of a better setup based on your suggestions above, would this setup below (visual attached) work to address to better signal quality and lower modem upstream power levels while preserving optimal speeds and throughput? I'm leaning toward your second option.

Main changes from my current setup would be 3 things:

1. Moving the modem to the closet where the coax cables are coming at a central point
2. Getting an additional GoCoax MoCA 2.5 adapter to connect to the modem in the closet
3. Removing the 2-way splitter in the office, where the mesh router is located

If this setup does work, I may invest in another adapter and try this in the future (especially if I run into connectivity issues or drops due to my modem's currently high upstream power levels).

 

[krkaufman]

I'm leaning toward your second option.

(attachment)

Actually, the suggested scheme is standing in the middle of the highway, with Options 1 & 2 on either side. The diagram is trying to use a single MoCA network for both WAN and LAN connectivity. (To what are the “modem” and “router’ MoCA adapters connected via Ethernet? To what, then, would the two remote mesh nodes be linked via their MoCA adapters?)

Option 1, above, adds one retail MoCA adapter to extend the single MoCA network … because the router has been moved and so the extra adapter is needed to extend the “router LAN” MoCA network to one more location.

Option 2 effects two separate MoCA networks over shared coax, for distinct WAN and LAN connectivity — with the requisite Ethernet connections for each, and operating at non-overlapping RF frequencies. (see this post for add’l background) Notably, the router hasn’t moved, so the “LAN” MoCA node count remains 3, but 2 “WAN” MoCA adapters must be added to effect the WAN link between modem and router, and it must be a pair of Frontier FCA252 adapters (as explained above and in the just-linked post) to maintain full throughput for each MoCA 2.5 network, relying on their ability to operate at 400-900 MHz — noting the configuration is incompatible with OTA or cable TV.

p.s. Let’s not forget Option 3.

 

[krkaufman]

If this setup does work, I may invest in another adapter and try this in the future (especially if I run into connectivity issues or drops due to my modem's currently high upstream power levels).

Aside from your modem signal levels — which aren’t really a “problem” if within spec and things are working — the isolation suggestions (not presented in any order, preference or otherwise) were intended as much or more towards planning for DOCSIS 3.1+ signals encroaching on the MoCA [Band D] frequency range. A “two birds, one stone” approach if the modem signal levels continued to cause any anxiety or actual issues.

 

[unioncorps]

Actually, the suggested scheme is standing in the middle of the highway, with Options 1 & 2 on either side. The diagram is trying to use a single MoCA network for both WAN and LAN connectivity. (To what are the “modem” and “router’ MoCA adapters connected via Ethernet? To what, then, would the two remote mesh nodes be linked via their MoCA adapters?)

Hmm.. I guess I'm not understanding. Using the new diagram as reference, my basic thought was that the modem would get the cable signal and convert it to internet data then send it to the MoCA adapter. In my mind, this would be no different than plugging directly to the modem - whether the router or even a laptop then be able to access the internet.

Assuming that's the case, that MoCA adapter would send that signal through the splitter to all of the connected coax cables in each room. Then devices connected to each respective MoCA adapter would receive an internet connection.

 

[krkaufman]

Assuming that's the case, that MoCA adapter would send that signal through the splitter to all of the connected coax cables in each room. Then devices connected to each respective MoCA adapter would receive an internet connection.

Think of it this way… hypothetically IF the modem, router and add’l mesh nodes could all be interconnected using Cat6 network cables, would you use an Ethernet hub to interconnect:

• the modem Ethernet WAN port,
• the router Ethernet WAN port, and
• the two mesh nodes?

Don’t the mesh nodes need to be connected via the router LAN, not connected to a network segment on the outside of the router firewall?

 

[krkaufman]

p.s. Let’s not forget Option 3.

Just to confirm, there’s no telephone connection between the closet and current modem/router location, that might actually be a CAT5+ cable? Either that or a second coax line would offer the best solution.

 

[unioncorps]

Think of it this way… hypothetically IF the modem, router and add’l mesh nodes could all be interconnected using Cat6 network cables, would you use an Ethernet hub to interconnect:

• the modem Ethernet WAN port,
• the router Ethernet WAN port, and
• the two mesh nodes?

Don’t the mesh nodes need to be connected via the router LAN, not connected to a network segment on the outside of the router firewall?

Ahhhh!! Makes sense! In my diagram, I would just be having the first MoCA adapter getting an internet signal but there wouldn't be any internet signal traversing internally across the other MoCA adapters in the different rooms without use of LAN ports.

I guess in this case, option 1 makes sense the most sense as in the full relocation of the modem and router in the closet itself with an additional MoCA adapter there too. Only thing I'd hate is for my Orbi router to be stuck in a closet that normally is closed so Wi-Fi would still not be good (or less than optimal).

Just to confirm, there’s no telephone connection between the closet and current modem/router location, that might actually be a CAT5+ cable? Either that or a second coax line would offer the best solution.

Actually, I do see what I think is a CAT 5 cable and several CAT5e cables based on the labeling on the cables themselves. They look to be connected to a telephone circuit board in the closet, where the rest of the coax cables are coming in. I have no idea where these lead to and how to find out, but I know the majority of the rooms (ie. bedrooms, bonus room, and office) have a telephone jack somewhere. I saw somewhere where, similar to the use case for MoCA, you can use existing telephone cabling as long as they are at least CAT5+ as ethernet cables, but the whole crimping and delicate process of attaching RJ45 connectors to get good signal seems intimidating.

 

[krkaufman]

I guess in this case, option 1 makes sense the most sense as in the full relocation of the modem and router in the closet itself with an additional MoCA adapter there too. Only thing I'd hate is for my Orbi router to be stuck in a closet that normally is closed so Wi-Fi would still not be good (or less than optimal).

Well, that's why there's Option 2, but implementing it as explicitly diagrammed above, using a pair of Frontier FCA252 MoCA 2.5 adapters set to their "25GW" configuration setting.

But both Options 1, 2 and all your existing MoCA adapters are probably moot, given what sounds like CATx cabling available between the closet and your rooms.

Actually, I do see what I think is a CAT 5 cable and several CAT5e cables

I recommend posting pics of what you see, as well as pulling a telephone jack wallplate or two and posting pics of their backsides (from right and left angles) to detail how they're wired.

Trust me ... with a tiny bit of instruction, you'll easily be able to rework the CATx lines for networking. But first... Do you have landline telephone service?

Aside from the above, here's a post from over on reddit highlighting the basic tasks in reworking phone lines for networking:

• central Cat5+ termination highlights/outline

 

[krkaufman]

Before abandoning all MoCA connectivity, a quick followup as to what Option 3 could look like with the addition of a single CATx cable between the closet and current modem/router location ... after moving the modem to the closet and establishing a direct connection between it and the ISP, sans filters or splits:



But as mentioned, Option 1-3 are all moot if you get the CATx lines fully reworked for at least the 3 critical rooms.

.

---

 

[unioncorps]

Thanks @krkaufman! When I get a minute, I'll post pictures of the CAT cables in the closet along with what's behind one of the telephone jack wall plates. I do not have/use a landline, nor have a service.

You're updated layout of Option 3 makes sense. But for future proofing purposes and assuming I'm able to successfully wire that one CAT5e cable from the closet going to my office where my router currently is located, wouldn't there be limitation of speed if I were to purchase a > 1 Gbps internet plan from Xfinity down the road? I'm specifically talking about the modem WAN connection to the router WAN connection in your diagram... asking because I believe CAT5e is rated for up to 1 Gbps speed and the rest of the ethernet cabling I'm using is CAT6.

And on a similar note, if I were to rewire all of the CAT5e cables used as telephone lines currently, wouldn't MoCA 2.5 still be faster as far as throughput/speeds because of the 1 Gbps limitation of CAT5e? (that is, without physically running new CAT6 cabling and just using the existing cabling)

 

[krkaufman]

I believe CAT5e is rated for up to 1 Gbps

Depends on cable and termination quality, but Cat5e can actually do up to 10 Gbps ... at shorter distances (<45m). (link) Added to the full duplex nature of Ethernet and direct connections to a GigE or better switch, CATx cabling would have far greater overall throughput relative to a shared MoCA 2.5 network, as diagrammed. Even with dedicated MoCA pairs and 2.5 GbE gear, a MoCA 2.5 link is roughly equivalent to full duplex 1.25 Gbps, with unidirectional max of 2.5 Gbps -- both of which would under-utilize the associated 2.5 GbE gear required to achieve the speeds.

Then there's the latency. MoCA will add a bit of latency relative to a direct Ethernet connection, so Ethernet would still be preferred even were throughput equivalent.

If Cat5e+ is possible, it's the way to go; MoCA's a solid fallback, but a fallback.

Worst case, if your Cat5e cables *are* limited to 1 Gbps (full duplex), they still offer superior performance to a shared MoCA network, and the cost of getting them working, tools & parts included, should be less than a single additional retail MoCA adapter. And if well terminated, as linked, you can then use some 2.5 GbE gear (or better) running iPerf3 to test each line's effective throughput max.

 

[Christos]

Then there's the latency. MoCA will add a bit of latency relative to a direct Ethernet connection, so Ethernet would still be preferred even were throughput equivalent.

Also, MoCA adapters is another point of failure. They can stuck or break and they are expensive to keep a spare one in the closet.
They are not very easy to find in the local stores, unlike an ethernet switch.