Scott Talks Joeys with Vivek Khemka (VIDEO)

[nelson61]

Nice to see an interview that sticks to the "stuff" and did not have any!!! of the puff questions you see the interviewers tossing in to push a product. Well done by both participants on this interview!

you may be able to hook more wireless than (2) on but they have either not thoroughly tested or don't want to certify yet.

 

[rglore]

Dish's MoCA only has 8 channels and the Super Joey will use 4 of them so two Super Joeys would not leave any bandwidth for regular Joeys or a second Hopper over coax.

 

[HoTat2]

With all due respect to Vivek Khemka;

In that interview I strongly suspect he is wrong on the Super Joey connecting directly to the satellite dish LNB output. As that would mean the MoCA signal would have to travel between the LNB output ports as well as through the satellite input side of the Node for the SJ and Hopper to reach one another. And I have seen no indication the Dish 1000.x LNB and nodes were ever designed with such a capability.

I think the way this is going to work is if you have a Hopper-Joey installation with a solo node and wish to upgrade to a SJ, the solo node will have to be swapped out for a duo one. And the coax line to the SJ is then connected to the additional host output of the duo node. Or if you have a two Hopper installation, one Hopper must go and the SJ is simply placed on the vacated host line from the duo node there.

So to sum up the options appear as either 1 Hopper + 1 SJ + other Joeys (if desired) for 5 total tuners and full integration.

Or 2 Hoppers + other Joeys (if desired) for 6 tuners total, but with limited integration.

Either way a duo node is needed for either choice.

 

[HoTat2]

Dish's MoCA only has 8 channels and the Super Joey will use 4 of them so two Super Joeys would not leave any bandwidth for regular Joeys or a second Hopper over coax.

How do you figure that?

The MoCA 1.1 standard used by DISH and many other providers would select only 1 of those 8 assigned channel frequencies at a time (determined by the Network control node) to which all MoCA nodes then share for communication with one another via a Time Division Duplex (or "TDD") type access protocol coordinated by the NC.

 

[JM42]

With all due respect to Vivek Khemka;

In that interview I strongly suspect he is wrong on the Super Joey connecting directly to the satellite dish LNB output. As that would mean the MoCA signal would have to travel between the LNB output ports as well as through the satellite input side of the Node for the SJ and Hopper to reach one another. And I have seen no indication the Dish 1000.x LNB and nodes were ever designed with such a capability.

I think the way this is going to work is if you have a Hopper-Joey installation with a solo node and wish to upgrade to a SJ, the solo node will have to be swapped out for a duo one. And the coax line to the SJ is then connected to the additional host output of the duo node. Or if you have a two Hopper installation, one Hopper must go and the SJ is simply placed on the vacated host line from the duo node there.

So to sum up the options appear as either 1 Hopper + 1 SJ + other Joeys (if desired) for 5 total tuners and full integration.

Or 2 Hoppers + other Joeys (if desired) for 6 tuners total, but with limited integration.

Either way a duo node is needed for either choice.

You only need a node if you want band stacking for the third tuner. SJ only has two tuners, therefor no need for a node. A small and relatively cheap diplexor type device with "to node," "to dish," and "to joey" ports would be all that is needed.

Not exactly "directly" to the LNB, but no need for a node replacement.

 

[mike123abc]

You only need a node if you want band stacking for the third tuner. SJ only has two tuners, therefor no need for a node. A small and relatively cheap diplexor type device with "to node," "to dish," and "to joey" ports would be all that is needed.

Not exactly "directly" to the LNB, but no need for a node replacement.

The other reason for the node is to tie in the Super Joey to the MOCA network...

 

[DWS44]

did I here him say that you may be able to hook more super joeys on but they have either not tested or don't want to certify more because they don't know 100 percent positive that the bandwidth will support it?

I believe he said that in reference to the Wireless Joeys and their connectivity to their dedicated WAP.

 

[JM42]

The other reason for the node is to tie in the Super Joey to the MOCA network...

The "to node" option of the diplexor would do that. Below 900mhz for moca to the node, above 900mhz to the LNBs (to dish port), combined output to the SJ.

A stock, tried and true holland dpd2 diplexer should do the job, but dish will probably have a custom labeled version. Antenna/VHF/UHF port connected to the node client port, SAT port connected to the dish, in/out port connected to the SJ.

The node is essentially just a diplexor with band stacking electronics built in. No need for the band stacking on SJ.

 

[nelson61]

I believe he said that in reference to the Wireless Joeys and their connectivity to their dedicated WAP.

yes I edited the post to correct it to wireless

 

[HoTat2]

The "to node" option of the diplexor would do that. Below 900mhz for moca to the node, above 900mhz to the LNBs (to dish port), combined output to the SJ.

A stock, tried and true holland dpd2 diplexer should do the job, but dish will probably have a custom labeled version. Antenna/VHF/UHF port connected to the node client port, SAT port connected to the dish, in/out port connected to the SJ.

The node is essentially just a diplexor with band stacking electronics built in. No need for the band stacking on SJ.

Well I think with this method if a solo node is used, you would need a both a diplexor and also a splitter somewhere on the client line from the node to create an another input for the "to node" line from such a diplexor since the client line from the node is likely to still be needed by other regular Joeys the customer wishes to keep.

 

[JM42]

Well I think with this method if a solo node is used, you would need a both a diplexor and also a splitter somewhere on the client line from the node to create an another input for the "to node" line from such a diplexor since the client line from the node is likely to still be needed by other regular Joeys the customer wishes to keep.

That's no different than it is now. If you have a Hopper + two or three Joeys now you have a splitter(s) involved. No change except the splitter port that was going directly to a joey now goes to the diplexer and then to SJ.

Since most SJ installs would likely have more than one joey, they might develop an combo unit similar to what they did with the dpp triplexer. It could have one, two or three "moca" ports for the node or traditional joeys, and a "super joey" port. Still probably cheaper than a duo node.

 

[Tampa8]

Congrats Scott, great job. Dish really owes this site alot for getting relevant info out about it's products.

 

[navychop]

The other reason for the node is to tie in the Super Joey to the MOCA network...

And if you've tied in the SJ to a host output of a duo node, WHY would you also need a connection to the LNB? Just ignore the "triple" in the bandstacked.

 

[HoTat2]

That's no different than it is now. If you have a Hopper + two or three Joeys now you have a splitter(s) involved. No change except the splitter port that was going directly to a joey now goes to the diplexer and then to SJ.

Since most SJ installs would likely have more than one joey, they might develop an combo unit similar to what they did with the dpp triplexer. It could have one, two or three "moca" ports for the node or traditional joeys, and a "super joey" port. Still probably cheaper than a duo node.

OK, that should work;

And I'll retract my prior statement of Kimka's probable error if he was implying something like this diplexor arrangement and not just a direct connection to the LNB from the SJ as it seems he was claiming in the interview.

If fact with this diplexor hookup, a duo node, and a DPP44 switch, it should be possible to get two Hoppers, a SJ, and other regular Joeys on the same network.

But then again this may be too much for the MoCA bandwidth to sustain.

 

[jcrandall]

Nice interview guys. The super joey as a way to add two tuners to a hopper setup is a hell of an idea, many houses are fine with three but here is an economical way to get 5 total. Also allows upgrading their current customer base without having to upgrade to new hardware, very scalable.

 

[brad1138]

With all due respect to Vivek Khemka;

In that interview I strongly suspect he is wrong on the Super Joey connecting directly to the satellite dish LNB output. As that would mean the MoCA signal would have to travel between the LNB output ports as well as through the satellite input side of the Node for the SJ and Hopper to reach one another. And I have seen no indication the Dish 1000.x LNB and nodes were ever designed with such a capability.

I think the way this is going to work is if you have a Hopper-Joey installation with a solo node and wish to upgrade to a SJ, the solo node will have to be swapped out for a duo one. And the coax line to the SJ is then connected to the additional host output of the duo node. Or if you have a two Hopper installation, one Hopper must go and the SJ is simply placed on the vacated host line from the duo node there.

So to sum up the options appear as either 1 Hopper + 1 SJ + other Joeys (if desired) for 5 total tuners and full integration.

Or 2 Hoppers + other Joeys (if desired) for 6 tuners total, but with limited integration.

Either way a duo node is needed for either choice.

I agree and thought the same thing. Although it might be possible with taps, splitters and/or diplexors, the Duo node seems the cleaner way to do it.

If it wasn't for the reduced storage (both my Hoppers are 80+% full) I think I would like this option over 2 Hoppers. Although, what I would really like is seamless integration with the Hoppers.

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

Yes indeed he did make a mistake. There is a splitter that is used.

In the interview taped earlier tonight he actually mentions that he made a mistake and explained how it was done.

Was in meetings and didn't have time to edit and upload the video. I hope to have it up tomorrow bandwidth permitting.


Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!

 

[navychop]

Scott: GO TO BED!

Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys

 

[Scott Greczkowski]

I can't still out with our staff at dinner. Waiting for our cab now.


Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!

 

[wallyhts]

Yes indeed he did make a mistake. There is a splitter that is used.

In the interview taped earlier tonight he actually mentions that he made a mistake and explained how it was done.

Was in meetings and didn't have time to edit and upload the video. I hope to have it up tomorrow bandwidth permitting.

Posted Via The FREE SatelliteGuys Reader App!

Yup we should have install sheets any day.

Its a splitter that passes signal from dish lnbf then injects the Moca.