ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: QOS and Dante  (Read 10441 times)

richard_cooper

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 121
Re: QOS and Dante
« Reply #20 on: October 14, 2016, 04:15:56 am »

"real" Cisco has had these for years.  Not a big fan of the rebranded Linksys stuff.  The GUI is bloated the CLI incomplete.  You can get a Nexus 5k for under 2k  N5K-C5010P-BF that's not a bog additional spend.  Instead of messing with VLAN trunking I would imagine a large production network could utilize Data Center Bridging.

In addition to other comments, fan noise is a big issue for a lot of what I do, and most enterprise type switches are far too loud. I have a number of HP Procurve (model escapes me) that work fine for Dante but I rarely use because of the noise. Also at nearly 80cm deep, that Nexus would not package well with, a least in my cases, other kit.

I've had great success with switches other than the SG300s or Yamaha, but mainly as I already owned them. Now there are recommended switches it's a no brainer in my mind.
Logged

Andrew Broughton

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1555
    • Check Check One Two
Re: QOS and Dante
« Reply #21 on: October 14, 2016, 11:26:40 am »

The SWP1-16MMF is about US$2100.  Quite a bit more than a 24 port SOHO switch but much better packaging and software UI.  The packaging and UI is the value add that commands the premium.
I love having connections on both sides, the built-in Ethercons and Fibre and of course the ability to optimize for Dante with just a button. I'm excited to use it.
Logged
-Andy

"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle..."

http://www.checkcheckonetwo.com
Saving lives through Digital Audio, Programming and Electronics.

Riley Casey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1345
Re: QOS and Dante
« Reply #22 on: October 14, 2016, 11:56:00 am »

Perhaps I just lead a charmed life but I've had really good luck with the small form factor Netgear switches that my local guru recommended and the SG300s that Yamaha subsequently recommended.  Those are small enough to velcro into the racks on top of the UPSs and are easily patched to rack panels on the rack surface for the day in, day out mating of connectors while giving me plenty of ethernet patch points for DVS connections and utility work.  Fiber connections are fully loaded on all my switches so that I can have one dedicated to the Opticalcon on the rack panel and another available for bare LC connections.  None of the switches arrived with any of the prohibited functions enabled and the only operational problems I've encountered over the years have been crossed fiber connections and the odd firmware mismatch.  This stuff will work pretty flawlessly if given a chance.  Cross rented Dante gear is actually easier now to use than some analog gear from the gold old days and I'm a helluva lot happier renting in a 150 meter opticalcon cable than I was renting in 300 feet of 56 pair.

Anyone tried the Yamaha switches yet?
http://www.yamahaproaudio.com/global/en/products/interfaces/swp1/index.jsp

Looking at using them on my tour next year. Networking is the only place where I run into problems with Yamaha gear plus I'd like to run fibre to FOH.

Justice C. Bigler

  • SR Forums
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2268
  • Somewhere between the Atlantic and Pacific
    • My homepage
Re: QOS and Dante
« Reply #23 on: October 14, 2016, 03:35:15 pm »

FWIW, the Rational Acoustics guys have been using the NetGear Prosafe GS108T gigabit switches with a Yamaha TIO1608s for their training sessions for a while without issue.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B003KP8VSK/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pd_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=3S4KD2RJA2CIB&coliid=I2TOS4S6FP112U&psc=1
Logged
Justice C. Bigler
www.justicebigler.com
Head Audio/A1 Blue Man Group North American Tour

Aram Piligian

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
Re: QOS and Dante
« Reply #24 on: October 14, 2016, 09:23:55 pm »

This topic is super timely actually.  Yesterday I was getting ready to go through our switches (SG300s) and set QoS stuff, and then upon reading more carefully I realized that the Yamaha-given values on their website for QoS are basically just for dedicated Dante networks.  If I'm sharing the network with other data (mostly just control data for wireless gear or JBL stuff), what other values do I need to consider giving priority to?  What if we add something like Helixnet into the mix?
Logged

David Sturzenbecher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1595
  • So. Dak.
    • Sturz Audio
Re: QOS and Dante
« Reply #25 on: October 14, 2016, 10:56:55 pm »

This topic is super timely actually.  Yesterday I was getting ready to go through our switches (SG300s) and set QoS stuff, and then upon reading more carefully I realized that the Yamaha-given values on their website for QoS are basically just for dedicated Dante networks.  If I'm sharing the network with other data (mostly just control data for wireless gear or JBL stuff), what other values do I need to consider giving priority to?  What if we add something like Helixnet into the mix?

That is not correct.  The Yamaha values are for mixed networks.   If you read Mac and My posts near the top, it states if you are on a dedicated dante network, you don't need QOS at all.   QOS is what give audio priority over everything else.   Your facebook feed can wait, audio sounds really bad when it waits.
Logged
Audio Systems Design Engineer
Daktronics, Inc.
CTS-D, CTS-I
AES Full Member

Mac Kerr

  • Old enough to know better
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6562
  • Audio Plumber
Re: QOS and Dante
« Reply #26 on: October 15, 2016, 12:41:03 am »

This topic is super timely actually.  Yesterday I was getting ready to go through our switches (SG300s) and set QoS stuff, and then upon reading more carefully I realized that the Yamaha-given values on their website for QoS are basically just for dedicated Dante networks.  If I'm sharing the network with other data (mostly just control data for wireless gear or JBL stuff), what other values do I need to consider giving priority to?  What if we add something like Helixnet into the mix?

The tiny bit of data generated by control systems will have no impact. You should be running a GB network, and that will let you have 500 channels of audio on any link. If you only have 250 channels of audio you still have 500MB of bandwidth available. I don't think you'll run out of bandwidth.

Mac
Logged

Scott Holtzman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5590
  • Ghost AV - Avon Lake, OH
    • Ghost Audio Visual Systems, LLC
Re: QOS and Dante
« Reply #27 on: October 15, 2016, 03:08:10 am »

Some thoughts, I don't know the reason behind Audinate using the SG300 as the reference switch, it could have just been what they had in the lab.

There is nothing inherently special about it, nor does it have any features that make it application specific for audio.

In reality any modern switch will be non-blocking at gigabit speeds and standards compliant will work fine in a properly designed network.  Dual networks remove the need for redundant power and  most switches have a stack manager built into the GUI for central management.

You are not reconfiguring often so indeed having a common switching fabric vs a traditional trunked vlan configuration is major overkill. 

I find it very interesting that the top tier audio professionals, who would never cut corners on wireless, consoles etc., don't see the value proposition of enterprise network gear.  From the gauge of the sheet metal, to robust low noise power supplies, higher level of software QC and traceable updates, robust central management and performance tools, enterprise/data grade gear can survive the road and most important is backed up by vendor support and 24/7 service contracts like all your other gear.

The Yamaha switch, on the surface has a similar value prop and the advantage of the Ethercon connectors. 

If I was building a network rack for touring I would have some type of LIU/breakout panel as SFP and standard RJ-45's aren't designed for the stresses of repeated connect/disconnect cycles.

Logged
Scott AKA "Skyking" Holtzman
River Delta Audio is now:

Ghost Audio Visual Solutions, LLC
Cleveland OH
www.ghostav.rocks

Aram Piligian

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 86
Re: QOS and Dante
« Reply #28 on: October 15, 2016, 08:14:37 am »

That is not correct.  The Yamaha values are for mixed networks.   If you read Mac and My posts near the top, it states if you are on a dedicated dante network, you don't need QOS at all.   QOS is what give audio priority over everything else.   Your facebook feed can wait, audio sounds really bad when it waits.

That's what I thought!  Which is why I was confused and second-guessed myself when I read this on Yamaha's guide:

Quote
For a dedicated Dante network, set 56 (CS7) to “4”, 46 (EF) to “3”, 8 (CS1) to “2”, and everything else to “1”. In a network that includes other systems besides Dante (for example, a pre-existing LAN VoIP telephone system), these settings may need to be adjusted slightly. Discuss the specifics with your network administrator.

I know networking basics but definitely don't have the knowledge to be a network admin, sooo... anyone have recommendations for good books about networking from the ground up?

Logically I know I'm not going to run out of bandwidth and we're probably fine, but I just wanted to make sure that if I'm going to go in and set the QoS once and for all, I'm not missing something.  We're probably getting a HelixNet system within the next year and definitely want to take advantage of the existing switch infrastructures we use without creating more problems.  The bandwidth that 12 channels of comm use is pretty minimal for sure, but I don't want to end up changing the priority of that system if I don't have to. 

Scott, the company I work for uses breakout panels on the back of our racks with ethercons, and it definitely seems like the way to go.  Of course, there are times we end up plugging cables straight into the switch, but for the most part, our snakes and racks and consoles all connect with ethercon.  Here's a pic of the back of one of our racks, which also has a BLU-806 we use for system processing (hence the analog/digital ins and outs on the bottom half).  The rack contains a Rio 3224, two SG300s, and the BLU.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2016, 09:15:48 am by Aram Piligian »
Logged

Dave Stevens

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 29660
Re: QOS and Dante
« Reply #29 on: October 16, 2016, 01:45:48 am »


I find it very interesting that the top tier audio professionals, who would never cut corners on wireless, consoles etc., don't see the value proposition of enterprise network gear.  From the gauge of the sheet metal, to robust low noise power supplies, higher level of software QC and traceable updates, robust central management and performance tools, enterprise/data grade gear can survive the road and most important is backed up by vendor support and 24/7 service contracts like all your other gear.

While you might consider it cutting corners, it's not.  The short answer is we know what we are doing with regards to choosing suitable components for mission critical systems.  Be it audio transport, data, whatever, the configs for our apps in the majority of cases are set and forget.  The switch is there as a support part, much the same way an XLR connector might be.  Were these extra features able to add to the application it might be determined to be a better cost value. 

Cash isn't unlimited and even though we're doing big gigs with big budgets, we still have to be smart with the dollar. Buying an enterprise grade switch when there are more cost effective solutions that do exactly what is required isn't being smart with the dollar.  In the same way we wouldn't take an SD7 into a gig when a QL was suitable, we wouldn't buy switches that are more expensive that don't really add anything to our app.  At this gig the difference if using Dante with a redundant loop and a few spares is the difference between US$60k or so and under $15k.  (assumes 20 x $3k enterprise 24 port L3 GB switch w/ fiber module or 20 x $600 SG24 w/ fiber module) Is there a $45k difference in real world use for a Dante app?  For all but a small handful of gigs in the world, no. 

The SG wasn't used as a reference because that's all they had laying around.   ::)  The Audinate folks know a bit about networking...

From the early days of UDP audio over UTP there have been issues with switch types and choices starting with Cobranet in the 90s.  The SG was likely chosen because it's readily available, affordable for most apps, relatively easy to use with the performance/features required for the application.

To address the specific advantages claimed in your post...

Service:  Spares need to be available at the job or in the room.  You don't worry about what happened to it, you swap it out and get on with the show.  The shop techs or day crew will slap it around and see what happened.  I don't need the same level support with a switch that I need from Meyer, Yamaha or Digico.  Besides, Cisco isn't going to be able to support Dante (or likely even know what it is).

Deployment configs: These apps already use breakouts to panels with ethercon or opticon or whatever the app needs.  Doubtful you'll find anyone in the bigs using only plastic RJ45s for all gigs, all the time.  There will always be some here and there to patch as needed, that's the nature of a one off.  As a rule you'll see ethercons and appropriate optical connectors.  As of the PSU, if it passes signal without issue and stays powered up, that's what it needs to do.  If the PSU design were to impact either the performance or reliability of the switch, that's a different issue.  The dual, hot swappable PSUs are good, but it comes at a steep price.

If you have some specific use cases or failure modes in this application that shows the SG unsuitable I'm all ears.
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: QOS and Dante
ยซ Reply #29 on: October 16, 2016, 01:45:48 am ยป


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.066 seconds with 22 queries.