2 Messages
U-verse TV routing questions
Hi
I have AT&T fiber running from a BGW320-505 in passthrough mode to my UDMP with a USW-Pro-24 and everything works fine for me. The BGW320 is set as 192.168.2 and the UDMP main lan is 192.168.1 with a couple of other networks configured for vnc and vlans. My U-verse TV is connected directly to the BGW320 and works fine as well. I have ethernet run from my network room to all the other rooms of the house and they also ran coax from there to 3 of the rooms though I never use that.
Everything is running fine but I'd like to be able to move my U-verse TV boxes to some other locations but with just one ethernet cable run to the other rooms that is an issue. I've had a few ideas and wanted to get input from people on them before doing down one road or the other.
Ideally I could have a switch that connected both the BGW320 and my UDMP to the one cable run and another switch at that end that would rout the two networks to the correct devices but don't see how I can configure that. Can't have a network on the UDMP set up for the 192.168.2 traffic as it sees that as its WAN address space.
So considering some other options. 1) ethernet to coax adapter and just use the 3 coax cables but be limited to the three rooms with it, 2) ethernet to wifi adapter to connect the boxes up the the BGW320 wifi or 3) powerline adapter to connect the boxes to the BGW320.
Any thoughts/comments on the options or other suggested solutions?
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
36.8K Messages
3 years ago
That's what I do. I have a two switches that implements VLAN with tagging. On the switch near my network devices:
On the other end of the ethernet run in the living room, I have another switch that does VLAN with tagging:
Switches that support VLAN with tagging are not all that expensive.
(edited)
0
0
WaltSnowrancruzick
2 Messages
3 years ago
We have the ATT TV as well as they talked us into trying it when we began the move to our new home and find the U-Verse TV to be far superior to it. ATT TV is missing a lot of the channels, particularly some of the locals and the DVR and interface have enough issues that we find it frustrating to use after having U-Verse TV for so many years. U-Verse TV isn't perfect but given the cost difference isn't really isn't that much, it is worth it for us. U-Verse was built on IPTV and have apps to watch it on the road as well. I know that at some point in the future, AT&T plans to shut it down for good but for now, it is about the best option available to us for what we want and works well for us.
0
JefferMC
ACE - Expert
•
36.8K Messages
3 years ago
They pushed and pushed me several months ago--with nearly every interaction-- to switch to DIRECTV stream (which was called AT&T TV for a while) when I upgraded to fiber. I told them "no."
The fundamental difference of the multicast over the private network vs. unicast over the public Internet leads to a much higher level of protection from buffer underruns.
The buffers are likely much smaller in the U-verse TV receivers, but that's okay, they can be.
0
0