cross-posted from: https://sh.itjust.works/post/63691946
Looking for advice on setting up a new whole home network and the direction to take of MoCA over existing cabling vs running new Ethernet Cat6A:
Recently in a new space that has an existing HomeConnect CSMAPDU9VPI with coax cables run throughout the home, which seems like a great candidate to just use MoCA and get up and running faster:
But I am also interested in “future proofing” the network setup and replacing the coax cables that are already run with Cat6A Ethernet, all connecting to a central 10G switch / homelab setup.
Is it worth the effort to re-run all of the cables and swap out the wall plates or just go with the simple thing an run with a MoCA setup? I’d really prefer to not spend on one setup with the plan to update in the future, but maybe that’s the compromise solution to get setup and running sooner.
The CSMAPDU9VPI is currently completely isolated from the cable line to the modem (picture above is old and shows a cable connected to the IN port, this cable is no longer connected) so I don’t think I have to worry about interference with my DOCSIS 3.1 service / modem.
I certainly wouldn’t remove existing cables, that’s effort for little to no gain.
Surprisingly, there’s very little anymore that exposes the bandwidth difference between wireless and wired, and I run a media server at home.
I see the performance difference when copying files, but that’s about it.
I have multiple local devices streaming video (over wifi), while the devices that really need a wired connection get one via a single cable and small switches.
For example there’s a cat5e running to a 5 port gigabit switch behind the TV. So the TV gets a drop and anything else I may need there (Apple TV, dedicated media PC, etc) can use the switch.
Currently have 3 of these switches, with about 10 devices directly wired, but only 3 runs from the primary switch.
NAS sits next to my server, so they’re on the same switch with just patch cables. Pretty much everything else get wifi if it supports it.
You are probably fortunate enough to live in an area with not a lot of wireless interference, or don’t have a lot of wireless devices on your network, or all your devices are rather modern.
You can have good wireless…it won’t be as good as wired, never will or can be. By it’s very nature it has to be a shared medium, which by it’s very nature must be half duplex. Then there is the matter of sharing time with other stations on the same channel (and not necessarily on your network or under your control).
But for most things it can easily be “good enough”. Certainly wouldn’t run a server on wireless. Generally worse performance for realtime voice/video/gaming as well, because latency and jitter matter, and by having to share the channel with other stations, jitter is a fact of life.
And unsteady wireless is the #1 cause of VPN complaints in my office. By a very wide margin. Miraculously the problem always goes away as soon as they plug in.
But for casual web browsing, occasional large downloads (there’s a reason mobile apps don’t really show you how many B/s your transferring), streaming media…yeah, wireless can easily be good enough.
I have 53 nearby wireless networks. Lots of interference.
Channel scan charts just look like a bunch of color mixed together.
I used to modify my access points to use non-standard channels to help.
Still, other than copying media files, it’s fine.
In theory, yeah, modern WiFi and gigabit Ethernet are about the same speed. But WiFi will always be less reliable, the bandwidth is shared rather than per device, and if you have neighbors you will lose some to interference. Also, cat6 can get you to 10 gigabit, so is much more future proof.
I hesitate to say they are the same speed because there are more variables with wifi than Ethernet, many of them outside your control. With Ethernet, you get what you build. Period.
WiFi is more optimistic. It can theoretically be fast but you cannot rely on it to perform as you plan at any given moment.
WiFi is a convenience technology and it’s great but if it’s even remotely important, it should never rely on WiFi.
True.
It really depends on a lot of “what ifs”.
I’ve been through the cabling thing in multiple places since 1996…
Today I run cable as-needed. If wi-fi gets it done, I’m not putting in the effort for cable.
If wifi isn’t getting it done, I’ll run a single cable for the location with issues, and drop in a gigabit switch (if needed).
The days of running cable “just in case” are in the past, for me.