Cable Internet & Satellite TV

[tdogg72]

I searched the forum and the dish network site for an answer to my question and did not find it. But I cant imagine this hasnt been asking before, so I apologize if it has.

This is the sceneario: (this is for my Dad's house)

He has a dual tuner DVR/Receiver. There is a RG6 cable going from one of the tuners out connector/port, to a coax outlet in another room(the Den), where he has a TV hooked up to it. He wants to setup a desktop computer in the Den with high speed cable internet. Can he use a splitter in the Den and feed both his TV and a cable modem for the internet to his computer? So the real question is, will the DVR/Reciever let the internet communicate thru it?

I sketched a diagram so you can better understand my inquiry.

Thanks in advance!

 

[BFG]

I belive the answer to your question is the super home node...

http://www.eagleaspen.com/products/products_1.php?id=31

This is something dish provides, but since you're already installed, i'm not sure what It'll cost you.

 

[TuxCoder]

First, in your diagram you don't indicate where the external cable modem's line will first be coming in but I'll assume you mean to plug it into the 522's "antenna in" port...

So the real question is, will the DVR/Reciever let the internet communicate thru it?

The answer here is no. At least probably not worth trying. The only thing coming out of the TV2 output is the single internally modulated UHF channel used for the receiver's display on the "remote" TVs. TV1 is almost the same, except it's a VHF channel (specifically, can be either 3 or 4). The only possible saving grace is the TV1 output can also pass through the "antenna input" on the back of the 522. But this is only when you press the TV/Sat (or Sat/Video, can't remember) button on the remote. That cuts off the receiver's display and basically just internally routes the antenna connection to the TV1 output. So to make a short story long, it might work if you use TV1 but then you can't watch Dish Network in the den while on the internet, and vice versa. Also the pass-through of the 522 might interfere somewhat with the cable modem's signal.

 

[BFG]

But this is only when you press the TV/Sat (or Sat/Video, can't remember)

Wow I just learned something, that's a lot easier, I always thought you had to turn off the reciver. neat.

 

[mdonnelly]

Wireless Network solution:
Put a splitter on the TV cable where it comes into the house. Put the cable modem that will feed a wireless router on one output, and connect the other output to the Antenna Input on the 522. Connect TV1 Out to the TV in the den. Get wireless interface cards for as many computers as you want in the house. That way you can watch TV in the den and still use your computers anywhere in the house.

 

[tdogg72]

First, in your diagram you don't indicate where the external cable modem's line will first be coming in but I'll assume you mean to plug it into the 522's "antenna in" port...

I cleary stated and show that the cable modem is fed from one of the two tuner inputs.

 

[tdogg72]

Wireless Network solution:
Put a splitter on the TV cable where it comes into the house. Put the cable modem that will feed a wireless router on one output, and connect the other output to the Antenna Input on the 522. Connect TV1 Out to the TV in the den. Get wireless interface cards for as many computers as you want in the house. That way you can watch TV in the den and still use your computers anywhere in the house.

He already has wireless. But wireless sucks in my opinion. I want him to be able to have a land line connection to the internet. But without having to pull an extra cable into the den. (he said it was a really big job pulling the one in there that he is using now)

 

[TuxCoder]

I cleary stated and show that the cable modem is fed from one of the two tuner inputs.

Not to sound blunt or rude here, but I don't see where it is stated or shown. I'm talking about the cable line coming into the house, from your cable company. All the receiver has shown connected to it are the two tuner inputs from the satellite dish, the family room tv, and the splitter in the den going to its tv and the cable modem. My assumption is you're connecting the cable company's line into the antenna input (different from both of the satellite tuner inputs). Correct me if I'm wrong. And while diplexors may possibly be used (not 100% sure), I think you'll still be pretty much stuck in the same situation with the antenna in / TV1 passthrough scenario.

Just out of curiosity (and again not to sound rude), what don't you like about wireless? It's faster, even the now-fairly-cheap "B" (11 MBit) version, than cable internet. There are also many security options with most wireless access points and routers. One of my favorites is MAC filtering. WEP is not as important to me these days as it was years ago before everyone had their WEP-cracking wardriving software.

 

[chevyN8]

I cleary stated and show that the cable modem is fed from one of the two tuner inputs.

I think he wants to know where the cable from the cable company comes in? I don't see anywhere in the pic where the cable comes in. Anyway, what's the problem with wireless? If the wireless is having problems, maybe the equipment is screwed up. I've used wireless in my house for a couple of years without any problems. My cable modem and wireless router(currently a linksys wireless G) is in a back room in the basement. My computers can be anywhere in the house(and out on the patio) with internet(2 desktops and a laptop). I set-up and use wireless in 6 locations at work, so I know they can and do work good. Of course maybe you are thinking about wireless internet(as apposed to cable/dsl), which we have had mixed results with. Anyway, sorry for the long post. I'd just set up a wireless router at any location where the cable company cable comes into the house, then get a PCI/usb wireless card for the desktop. Our nearby walmart carries a lot of the linksys stuff...we have had the best luck with Linksys (many WRT54GS routers) I do computer/wireless/network stuff everyday, any questions just ask.

 

[Jahntassa]

I would say the internal modulator in the Dish reciever will probably block upstream communication for the modem, so no, that won't work too well. I agree with the wireless. It's been around for four years at least, it's proven technology.

 

[Neutron]

If you have to have a landline type connection why not run a Cat5 cable instead of another coax, since you say wireless isn't an option? The Cat5 cable is thinner than a piece of coax.

 

[TuxCoder]

Linksys (Cisco now! ) does provide very good wireless stuff. At my house I have my WAP11 that's been serving me well for several years--it's old enough to only have SNMP management, no fancy web-based interface (mine is the first production style WAP11 though which didn't support the newer web interface firmware last time I checked). I bought it before the router/AP combos were available. Even today I'd personally get an AP over a router/AP combo because my Linux server is my router/firewall solution.

I have set up a number of the Linksys newer wireless routers for other folks, and continue to be impressed with their quality and supported features.

 

[Jahntassa]

I still have my WAP11 1.0 running like a champ! Even got a power booster on it, I can get to my access point anywhere in the complex. I secured it, though, and you can't grab an IP addy on my network unless I know your MAC address first..haha!

 

[tdogg72]

Not to sound blunt or rude here, but I don't see where it is stated or shown. I'm talking about the cable line coming into the house, from your cable company. All the receiver has shown connected to it are the two tuner inputs from the satellite dish, the family room tv, and the splitter in the den going to its tv and the cable modem. My assumption is you're connecting the cable company's line into the antenna input (different from both of the satellite tuner inputs). Correct me if I'm wrong. And while diplexors may possibly be used (not 100% sure), I think you'll still be pretty much stuck in the same situation with the antenna in / TV1 passthrough scenario.

Tex, I apologize. I didn't understand what you were talking about. My bad, your right I did leave something out. How the coax cable from the utility gets into the house, where it comes in and how it would get to the cable modem. I don't know where it comes in,(My dad lives in another state and I am not familiar with his house that well, as it is new). I was thinking that the internet was coming from the satellite...well really i just wasnt thinking...

Somewhere in his house the coax from "the street" comes into his house. That is where he has the cable modem and a wireless access point.

Just out of curiosity (and again not to sound rude), what don't you like about wireless? It's faster, even the now-fairly-cheap "B" (11 MBit) version, than cable internet. There are also many security options with most wireless access points and routers. One of my favorites is MAC filtering. WEP is not as important to me these days as it was years ago before everyone had their WEP-cracking wardriving software.

I had a 11mbps wireless access point and wireless network cards at my house, and it was just too slow for data transfer between computers in the house. So I drilled holes in the walls and ran Cat 5E eithernet wire.

 

[chevyN8]

[QUOTE

I had a 11mbps wireless access point and wireless network cards at my house, and it was just too slow for data transfer between computers in the house. So I drilled holes in the walls and ran Cat 5E eithernet wire.[/QUOTE]

Just depends on what you need it for. Good ole wireless b works fine for internet, especially with just a few computers(or one in this case). Wireless G at 54mbps is nicer if you need the bandwidth, we have multiple databases that utilize the wireless G fully. With a cable modem and Linksys router wrt54gs you can have the router clone your network card's MAC so the ISP thinks the NIC is directly connected--around here the NIC's MAC must be registered with the ISP. Most decent routers will do the clone thing. All the PC's behind the router aren't actually 'on' the internet, which is also nice. Of course, cat 5 is the 'best' option if you can and/or want to drill the holes. Home improvement places (like Menards around here) have nice wall plates that can do many items in just one plate. Example, in my family room I put in...cat5 network cable, rg11 phone line, cable tv jack, sat coax jack--all in one regular size wall plate.

 

[TuxCoder]

Just depends on what you need it for. Good ole wireless b works fine for internet, especially with just a few computers(or one in this case).

That's what I meant above when I said even wireless-B is faster than cable internet. It won't be a bottleneck. Even with however many computers you have sharing the connection, your bottleneck will still be the 3Mbit cable internet connection (or whatever rate your provider has set your cablemodem to throttle itself at). Now, for any kind of intranet communications between your own computers, of course more bandwidth always helps.

With a cable modem and Linksys router wrt54gs you can have the router clone your network card's MAC so the ISP thinks the NIC is directly connected--around here the NIC's MAC must be registered with the ISP. Most decent routers will do the clone thing. All the PC's behind the router aren't actually 'on' the internet, which is also nice.

I wasn't aware of that ISP policy at places. Pretty sneaky but not clever enough. EarthLink (over TWC lines) where I am doesn't have that policy yet. Even if they did, I'd just register my server's card as that's the frontline connection and everything else is handled privately behind it through NAT.

 

[tdogg72]

At my house, the Wireless was not fast enough, because I wanted to be able to access video, pictures and audio to my computer downstairs. And I share my drives on each computer, so I can access files from whichever computer. With wireless it just wouldnt work. Wayy to slow.

Wireless didnt work for me, because it basicaly takes away your LAN connection. LAN's are suppose to be super fast. A Wireless LAN is not super fast.

But yes, Wireless works fine for downloading files from the internet and browsing web pages.

But maybe my dad doesnt need the high speed of a wired LAN. Maybe wireless will work fine for him.

 

[mdonnelly]

At my house, the Wireless was not fast enough, because I wanted to be able to access video, pictures and audio to my computer downstairs. And I share my drives on each computer, so I can access files from whichever computer. With wireless it just wouldnt work. Wayy to slow.

Wireless didnt work for me, because it basicaly takes away your LAN connection. LAN's are suppose to be super fast. A Wireless LAN is not super fast.

But yes, Wireless works fine for downloading files from the internet and browsing web pages.

But maybe my dad doesnt need the high speed of a wired LAN. Maybe wireless will work fine for him.

I didn't see anything in your diagram that would require 10/100MB. $100 bucks will set him up with wireless-G. That's more than enough for DSL/Cable modems.

 

[charper1]

Exactly mdonnelly!

tdogg, I have a D-Link 56G network that runs @ 108mbps which is more than fast enough (10mbps minimum should do) to stream audio & video over my entire home & property line to my laptop. If your wireless setup wont do that, then you either have bad equipment or incorrect settings.

List you gear, setting & setup and maybe we can get you up to speed.

 

[SimpleSimon]

... I wasn't aware of that ISP policy at places. Pretty sneaky but not clever enough. EarthLink (over TWC lines) where I am doesn't have that policy yet. Even if they did, I'd just register my server's card as that's the frontline connection and everything else is handled privately behind it through NAT.

Note that the MAC address implies the manufacturer and sometimes equipment type. Your ISP may not want a router on the wire - because they're too stupid to know that Microsoft has enough of the bugs worked out of Internet Connection Sharing to make it usable, so people can get around a one-computer restriction that way too.

All in all, the ISPs need to forget about such things and just supply bandwidth.