Ethernet over Coax (EoC) Shootout

Yea really disapointed Vigitron isn't on this test. We have had issues with some of these devices and when we tested Vigitron on the same coax it it worked flawlessly.

According to manufacturers we spoke to, this is likely due to improper or malfunctioning PoE circuitry requesting more power than is truly available...

Ethan, are the manufacturers saying that the PoE circuitry on the camera itself is faulty?

This is accomplished using a 4:1 BNC splitter, sold individually or as part of a 16 channel rack mount (below).

Is that NVT splitter a just an off the shelf part? It sounds like it's acting as a coax Ethernet hub. Do you think it would work on other manufacturers gear? (without Power up the coax, of course)

Also, would you be able to use these devices with a BNC/Cat 5 Balun and thereby use twisted pair instead of coax?

Very good comparison in general, however, as an NVT rep, I feel compelled to comment on a couple of issues. You make a point to disclose the fact that NVT can combine 4 cameras (and end adapters) into 1 headend adapter thus reducing the total number required for 4 cameras from 8 total adapters (competition) to only 5 with NVT, you don't make that distinction when comparing pricing per channel between NVT and the comptetitors. With the street price of under $1200 for a 4 channel kit, this brings the cost per channel (camera) for NVT to under $300. Far less that the $475/pair pricing referenced, although that would be accurate for only 1 camera. How many migrations are only 1 camera though? Also not discussed are factors such as built-in surge suppression, warranty (NVT has lifetime warranty) and the fact that NVT works equally well in a 2-wire application. This opens up the effectiveness of migrating from analog to IP in legacy applications such as Access Control, Video Intercom and others that would utilize 2-wire (or more) installations in the past. These differences make NVT certainly worth taking a closer look than just baseing a decision on a single camera channel price. Not to mention the rack or wall 'real estate' in placing 60 of the competitors adapters (in a 60 camera deployment) at the headend vs. only 15 NVT units. Other than that, great report.. :-)

You guys have no idea how perfect your timing was for this review. Thank you so much for doing it.

I tested some 10 EoC 1-2 years ago, and I found not many of them (in fact, was only NVT) would support multi-cast, which is a vital feature on a large and complex network. Would you please comment on this. thx

We recently used the Evefocus Palun units to replace an analog camera on a pole with an IP camera using the existing RG6 cable. Worked like a charm. At $120 for the set, it was cost effective too.

guys what happend to Axis?

http://www.axis.com/us/en/products/media-converters/axis-t8640

scenario:

An Axis 5512 PTZ replacing an analog PTZ on a pole with a local power source. the cable (UV resistant outdoor RG59u ) Is in good shape. Very difficult site regarding EMI. 4 standard power transformers within 10' of the aerial run up to the roof of the bldg then across and parallel to power and data feeders to a full up 200' cell tower. the axis/Veracity units would NOT sync and were useless in this environment. I tried an Altronix eBridge - 100% uptime since. These units are obviously more immune to EMI and/or induced noise on the cable.

For what it is worth. A real world application not 2 months ago. I am a believer....

The EOC Box seems to fit a residential application I have (my own home). Can you provide a link to a commercial source for the EOC Box?

A contact would be most helpful.

I see a comment on the http://eocbox.com/ web site about 128 bit encryption. If they are encrypting/decrypting the data at wire speed, that is a good feature.

Nice test. I'm doing similar Iperf comparison tests here

I would recommend to change the iperf Windows packet size to 128KB or even to 254Kb because modulation demodulation occur errors when using too small packet so your results could be distorted: EOC, VDSL and PLC , like WIFI/WIMESH are using Modulo/demolo frequencies and don't support well micro binary packets. Same with GB Twisted pair using higher frequencies.

For example, some PLC (yes, you read well : power line communication but not usig 110V for sure ) device can reach 180 Mbit/s real throughput with Iperf , but using higher packet value during test.

In real life I remind that a camera usually delivers more than 3Mbit/s so you can imagine the number of contiuous TCP/IP packets to transmit a single video (or 2 High/low streams ...) with a TCP packet limited to 1500B ! so better don't use anymore small value as 63KB, it was ok when using 10 Mb TP.

For example all my testing with Iperf on Veracity/Axis or NVT/Phybridge or Comnet or Muxlab are all giving exactly 94/95 Mbit/s with symetic results up to 500 meters.

Losing 0,5 W per 100 meters , some technologies are losing 1W/100 meters

Autopowered POE units are generally taken 2W from the POE budget

We can compare with Cat5E Twisted pair which can lose 5W each 100 Meters..

We've used the NVT's EoC's in the past and they've worked well for the most part. The thing to remember is when they say built in surge suppresion, they are also saying "don't use surge suppression with these", as we tried using some RJ45 surge supressors after the EoC end point and they caused problems, which NVT advised not to use since the units had built in surge. Took our the RJ45 surge suppressors and everything worked fine. The South East manager Mike Stark is very helpful and they'll help you design the implementatio of these.

Another thing to account for is the NVT units require a pairing or "device association" process where they have to get to know each other first using a short cable. I don't know why. But if one fails in the field, you can't just slap another one on and have it work. You have to go to the head end and pair it with a short cable first, then put install it at the end point.

Luis, surge suppressor are cutting the line, so decreasing the POE performances and budget and adding latencies (time out issues) This wil be the same for other standard POE repeaters.

The NVT mandatory short cable pairing you are talking about is a PLC Homeplug AV Pairing using the IEEE P1901 standard for PLC (as we are doing with standard Power Line Plugs by clicking the small pairing button ) . Phybridge who has recently taking over NVT is more using EoC technology. I have heard that PLC device rack encountered some techical issues.

You should look at American Fibertek.

I would actually like to see some comparisons with Comnet. I have used their devices since their inception, and have never had issues with their performance. But it would be nice to see some competitive data.

Do you find that when using a EOC device the PING becomes inconsistent? Ranging from 1,2,15,20,6,10,30,50ms. Or would you just take the average?

I find if I am having camera troubles some manufactures see 12ms ping and tell me to "fix my network"

Nitek is conspicuously absent.

You should add NITEK next round. We use Veracity and have gotten burned. NITEK has seemed to weather the storm in less than ideal power and environmental conditions.

Strange question, but have any of you used an EOC to link between two switches? We have found that the Everfocus Palun will only work if there is a PoE device at the receiver end of the link. We have previously only used them for a switch to camera connection.

Everfocus now is making a new device called the NETCO that will link two switches. It will still be PoE powered at the sender end, but won't require a PoE device at the receiver end to initiate the connection.

They are so new that only ADI has them listed as Special Order. Everfocus sales said they are available for drop shipping now through ADI and should be in their store inventories soon.

http://eocbox.com/ seems to be dead, anyone know if they still exist?

Thanks!

Ethan,  The EOC box fits our application.  The link to it above seems to be broken now (2015).

Wondering if the info is still up to date or would you recommend looking at something newer?  Have power wires... Thanks. 

Currently using Veracity VLS-1P-C and VLS-1P-B and experiencing higher than desired failure rate, probably due to heat. It would be great if IPVM would do a shoot out of UTP.

I am surprised you don't even mention the NVT-Phybridge POE over coax switches which use the same converter on the camer side but on the aggregation side (where the IP encoder fir the analog cams being replaced). They have a managed 24port version and an unmanaged 10 port version.

We tested one in January. Bought 3 of the 24 port managed for broader field tests in March. Then bought another 7 in a bulk purchase in June. We have 3 left and will likely buy a couple more 24 port and 5 or more of the 10 port.

Our deployment of IP cameras to replace analog had been delayed by many years due to recabling costs. Problem solved for the next 5 years until switch lifecycle window triggers by which time many of these locations will have been renovated and networking run as part of that renovation.