What's new

HomePlug - multiple networks?

  • SNBForums Code of Conduct

    SNBForums is a community for everyone, no matter what their level of experience.

    Please be tolerant and patient of others, especially newcomers. We are all here to share and learn!

    The rules are simple: Be patient, be nice, be helpful or be gone!

sfx2000

Part of the Furniture
Theoretically it should work, but I'm asking the hive mind...

Home has two broadband connections and 4 roommates...

Connection 1 is TimeWarner Cable - they provide the Broadband/Cable GW device, and this is by Roommate #1

Connection 2 is ATT U-Verse - this is DSL, and roommates 2 and 3 pay for this...

Both terminate in a common living area, provide their own WiFi SSID, and broadband drop... they want to extended the hardlines up stairs... running ethernet really isn't an option from the common area to the bedrooms..

Thoughts here... setting up two pairs of HomePlugs - set A for Roommate 1, and set B (one primary with two secondaries) for Roommates 2 and 3

So basically two distribution systems over home plug - I know performance won't be great, but again, with the hive mind's experience, is this doable?
 
You can set two pairs of adapters with different encryption keys and separate traffic. But everyting is going to share the same frequency space and therefore bandwidth.

Unlike Wi-Fi you can't control the channels that HomePlug uses.
 
I run VLAN trunking across my powerline adapter. You could run each on as separate VLAN providing you have equipment to do that. Just run the VLANs at the IP level by assigning their IP networks to the VLANs. Then all you have to do is run tunking across your powerline adapter and both networks will arrive on the other powerline adapter. Feed the other powerline adapter into a trunked switch port. You will have both networks available.
 
I run VLAN trunking across my powerline adapter. You could run each on as separate VLAN providing you have equipment to do that. Just run the VLANs at the IP level by assigning their IP networks to the VLANs. Then all you have to do is run tunking across your powerline adapter and both networks will arrive on the other powerline adapter. Feed the other powerline adapter into a trunked switch port. You will have both networks available.

That was my first thought, and it would probably be the approach I would do here at my place...

It's a remote location, and the folks there are not terribly technical, I need to do some more research on the whole homeplug thing with multiple networks running across the same power distribution...
 
The one problem I see is with the default gateway if you run separate routers. Make sure you can set the default gateway per VLAN so all the internet traffic goes out the right router. Running one router probably is not a problem.
 
They are running separate networks now - I had discussed load balancing and pooling the resources, but they're inclined to keep the networks separate - this is a house sharing arrangement...
 
Well you can do something as simple as separate isolated VLANs just for passing through the powerline adapter. If you want to share printers and things then it will be more complicated.
 
Well you can do something as simple as separate isolated VLANs just for passing through the powerline adapter. If you want to share printers and things then it will be more complicated.

They're not sharing any common network infrastructure - they've got decent footprint downstairs, it's the upstairs bedrooms that are hurting - I had a couple of old 802.11n router/AP's that I gave them (better to recycle for reuse than eWaste them out) to set up in AP mode - ended up getting two pairs today, and the kid set them up and things work ok...

Pair A - Network 1
Pair B - Network 2

each having their own keying...

So far, so good - one upside of having two ingress networks, consoles have a lot less issues with NAT...
 
Theoretically it should work, but I'm asking the hive mind...

It does work. I have a home network consisting of a DSL router, an AP, 5 managed switches, and almost 30 other devices...most of which are on Ethernet and the rest wifi.

Most of my devices are IP static-configured and all of them have IPs reserved with a MAC in the router.

On each switch I have five or six devices connected. I also have six ZyZEL AV2000 (PLA5456) adapters.

Because of the number of devices I have and the need for the PLA only in three rooms which I could not run Ethernet to I decided to see if it was better to create three separate HomePlug networks.

Each end of the HomePlug network is connected to its own switch port on my DrayTek Vigor2860 router. The other end is connected to a ZyXEL GS1900-8 switch.

I did this because I theorized the load on only one HomePlug master connected to the router was too much (at the time about 25 devices) and I wanted to split up that load.

This has not caused me any issues, and I feel my performance is better doing it that way.

I don't think the bandwidth from three separate HomePlug networks on the AC wiring is any issue because that would be essentially the same with the normal configuration. For me the issue is forcing all HomePlug traffic for over 20 devices through only one master. (Prior to doing it this way, I had only one master with an additional HomePlug endpoint for my entertainment center but have since run a long Ethernet cable to it since it's in the same room as my router. That setup had me at about 25 devices connected to one master.)

I have had this setup continuously for four months now with absolutely no hint of any problem.

Anyway, feel free to do it as it works just fine. THE ONLY THING that probably will not work for you is that the utility used with the adapters will only see one of the HomePlug networks.

It's not designed to detect more than one.
 
Last edited:
@thiggins has it correct. It's possible to run multiple networks over HomePlug, but the bandwidth will be split between the two. There really isn't a way to load balance because the networks are not being deployed from the same router. With the best HomePlug devices claiming bandwidth of 1Gpbs, but only delivering about 450Mbps real world, splitting up such a small amount of bandwidth between two networks may be a problem.
 
Last edited:
The bandwidth of the frequency which carries the signal on the power lines I believe is quite different than the throughput capability of data bits going to and from the master PLA. The device cannot handle the throughput of data bits that the device is rated at as far as carrying signals on the power line.

I believe it's correct to say that when using multiple power line networks, the bandwidth limit of the signal on the power line does not become an issue because of the fact that on a single power line network, you're only getting data throughput of about 1/3 the rated bandwidth of the signal traveling on the power line anyway.

I apologize for not having the terminology exactly correct...but I think you know what I'm getting at.

Therefore, the creation of multiple power line networks makes more efficient use of the bandwidth of the signal limit of the power line by getting around the limit the master has on throughput of data (for a 2000AV rated adapter, that is around 600-700 Mbps).

If someone who understands the basics of what I'm saying can show me I'm wrong, I'd be glad to hear it.

Summary of my theory:

Power line bandwidth limit is around 3x greater than the amount of data that can be transferred by a single master PLA.

Three power line networks merely make more efficient use of the total power line bandwidth by splitting the load amongst 3 master PLAs.
 
I apologize for not having the terminology exactly correct...but I think you know what I'm getting at.
Uh, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Every communication method has protocol overhead. In the case of lossy communication techniques like Wi-Fi and HomePlug, the overhead can be quite high. So you can have a raw PHY rate (the numbers manufacturers always cite), but a usable delivered rate much less. This is why "1200 Mbps" adapters produce ~450 Mbps best case usable throughput.

The simple point is that in a powerline network, whatever the number is, is shared by all nodes. Multiple "networks" created by VLAN or encryption keys all compete for the same bandwidth.

If three connections are each trying to use 300 Mbps, they're not going to get it. But if the total bandwidth requirements are lower than the powerline network capacity, they will. Note, however, this is not an easy calculation. Different nodes will have different maximum capacities due to reduced PHY rates because of noise and distance.
 
Uh, I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Every communication method has protocol overhead. In the case of lossy communication techniques like Wi-Fi and HomePlug, the overhead can be quite high. So you can have a raw PHY rate (the numbers manufacturers always cite), but a usable delivered rate much less. This is why "1200 Mbps" adapters produce ~450 Mbps best case usable throughput.

The simple point is that in a powerline network, whatever the number is, is shared by all nodes. Multiple "networks" created by VLAN or encryption keys all compete for the same bandwidth.

If three connections are each trying to use 300 Mbps, they're not going to get it. But if the total bandwidth requirements are lower than the powerline network capacity, they will. Note, however, this is not an easy calculation. Different nodes will have different maximum capacities due to reduced PHY rates because of noise and distance.

Thanks, I was just coming back to respond to this. I think he was implying that another network would be able to utilize some of the space that is considered overhead; therefore, making better use of the entire space. That's not possible, but it is a great thought.
 
Thanks, I was just coming back to respond to this. I think he was implying that another network would be able to utilize some of the space that is considered overhead; therefore, making better use of the entire space. That's not possible, but it is a great thought.

OK, fine...all I can say is that my powerline network performance is better splitting up into multiple networks. Trying to get 25 devices talking through one master with 4 end points vs. three masters with only one endpoint each has been a noticeable improvement. I don't see any negatives or even anything that suggests there is no significant positive difference.

(note: one PLA end point was eliminated in the living room which was close enough to use Ethernet cable, but that still left about 18 devices on three endpoints which I feel is still too many for one PLA master)

To answer the original question, it does work. I would encourage people to experiment as I have. I think there is a difference between what the power line itself can carry vs what one PLA master can carry. I think the powerline itself can carry more signal than a single PLA can carry equivalent data.
 
OK, fine...all I can say is that my powerline network performance is better splitting up into multiple networks. Trying to get 25 devices talking through one master with 4 end points vs. three masters with only one endpoint each has been a noticeable improvement. I don't see any negatives or even anything that suggests there is no significant positive difference.

(note: one PLA end point was eliminated in the living room which was close enough to use Ethernet cable, but that still left about 18 devices on three endpoints which I feel is still too many for one PLA master)

To answer the original question, it does work. I would encourage people to experiment as I have. I think there is a difference between what the power line itself can carry vs what one PLA master can carry. I think the powerline itself can carry more signal than a single PLA can carry equivalent data.

The physical layer (PHY) has no overhead, correct? If I take advantage of the fact that layer is not being utilized to its potential because a single master PLA is the limiting factor, then I feel you get some improvement with more than one PL network. I feel throughput is slightly increased overall. I don't think the single master PLA and 4 endpoints is using up all of the PHY layer's capability before the master hits its data throughput limit. Spreading out the traffic doesn't cause the PHY limit to be exceeded but less data has to be moved through each master than before.

I don't think it's a dramatic difference (like a 100% increase) but I feel it's definitely enough to justify doing it. Perhaps 30%. To me it's noticeable.

The networks do not interfere with each other over the power line and there are no traffic loops. They are definitely isolated. That is easy to prove by powering off the router and trying to reach a device attached to one of the other PLAs. You cannot at that point reach anything not on the same PL network.

There is a small twist that may be contributing me having better performance. I'm using ZyXEL PLA5456 PLAs which at mid-2016 were about the best out there. They make use of MIMO which utilizes all three lines of your home wiring instead of just two for SISO. That gives the PHY layer (powerline) more signal capacity. I think it helps make my point on utilizing the data throughput of combined multiple PLA masters over just one. There is room to carry more signal on the powerline. Forcing a large number of devices to connect through one PLA master is less optimal.
 
Last edited:
Since I was the one that started this thread - let me follow up...

My son has since moved, but we were successful at running two different HomePlug AV networks using the AC wiring as common media - worked well enough for their needs - common area was ethernet into the AV setup (TV/STB's/Gaming Consoles) and WiFi (SSID unique per provider) - and then HPNA over to the resident bedrooms.

We gave each "group" a unique name, and set the QoS as "Internet" - wasn't as good as ethernet, but "good enough" for the needs of the residents...
 
Since I was the one that started this thread - let me follow up...

My son has since moved, but we were successful at running two different HomePlug AV networks using the AC wiring as common media - worked well enough for their needs - common area was ethernet into the AV setup (TV/STB's/Gaming Consoles) and WiFi (SSID unique per provider) - and then HPNA over to the resident bedrooms.

We gave each "group" a unique name, and set the QoS as "Internet" - wasn't as good as ethernet, but "good enough" for the needs of the residents...

Yep, not as good as Ethernet but better than wifi. Good compromise for the price I think.
 
Yep, not as good as Ethernet but better than wifi. Good compromise for the price I think.

Since their house was a rental, running CAT5 up into the bedrooms wasn't an option, and the layout of the house didn't work very well for WiFi at the router/AP locations - MOCA wasn't much of an option either as the bedrooms weren't wired for Cable TV.

Since all were either recent grads or post grads, money was tight, so both the ATT DSL and Cox CM's were the 'starter' plans, which in this market basically means 5Mbit down, 1Mbit up at best...
 
So is it true there is more bandwidth in a AC line than what can be utilized by one set of powerline adapters?

So are you saying it is better to use 4 powerline adapters with encryption to run multiple networks than running 3 on the same network without the overhead of encryption?
 
Probably not a lot more, but I think there is...otherwise you wouldn't see the adapters speed continuing to increase. There has to be a ceiling somewhere.

HOWEVER, the main point I'm trying to make is that if you have more than one slave or satellite PLA connected to one master, obviously the master is taking the entire load for however many slaves are attached to it. I feel the master can get overwhelmed if you have too many endpoints attached to all the slave PLAs (I have between 15 and 20 because of the 8-port switches attached to the 3 slaves I have each have 5 or 6 devices attached to them). Spreading the load by having more than one PLA network makes sense to me in that way and it continues to work perfectly on my home network for 8 months now. I wouldn't do it any other way once I discovered that. I only wish the utility was capable of seeing more than one network, but that's a limitation of the utility not the layout. Works fantastic and I have the most stable home network I ever had.
 

Sign Up For SNBForums Daily Digest

Get an update of what's new every day delivered to your mailbox. Sign up here!
Top