Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lonnie Barrios]

I'm standing up redundant Dante networks for a performing arts center.  The consultant who designed this wants both audio networks (Audio A and Audio B, aka Dante Primary & Secondary) physically configured in a ring topology (switch A to switch B to... ...switch J back to switch A).  Spanning tree isn't going to like this and is going to block an interface somewhere on each ring (network).  If someone connects a device (or maybe a portable cabinet with multiple wireless microphone receivers connected to small switches) to the A network, STP will have to go through the election process for root bridge and determine if there is now a network loop.  I imagine this could take several seconds.  My question is how Dante will behave when it sees that the A network is having an interruption.  Will audio continue to play on the B network?  I'm thinking that if there were only one audio network, audio might be interrupted for sure.  We've never done a full redundant setup like this so I don't know how it will behave.  Perhaps the Dante devices will see an issue with the A network and start playing the stream that they also received on the B network.  If an interruption does happen because of STP when connecting a device to network A, it seems like connecting the switches in the portable to network A and B at the same time would definitely cause an interruption to audio.  Any ideas?

[Russell Ault]

{...} The consultant who designed this wants both audio networks (Audio A and Audio B, aka Dante Primary & Secondary) physically configured in a ring topology (switch A to switch B to... ...switch J back to switch A). {...}

What? Why?

{...} Any ideas?

Have you considered suggesting to your employer/client that the design of their PAC's Dante network should be left to someone who knows enough about networking to understand that Ethernet doesn't use a ring topology?

No good will come from turning a star into a ring.

-Russ

[Dave Pluke]

What? Why?

No good will come from turning a star into a ring.

Agreed. What century is this, anyway?

Dave

[Russell Ault]

Agreed. What century is this, anyway?

I mean, rings were super rare last century, too. As near as I can tell, the only widely-deployed system to use a physical ring topology is the PSTN's SS7. The only one I've ever seen in action is the (admittedly fairly brilliant) Optocore system that DiGiCo licenses. (Strangely, and despite the name, IBM's Token Ring network protocol doesn't actually use a ring topology at the physical layer.)

{...} Any ideas?

Here's another one that will allow you to get up and running quickly (and kick the innevitable headaches down the road, ideally for somebody else to deal with): casually "forget" to make one of the connections in the loop and then also "forget" to enable Spanning Tree Protocol in the switches. Problem, uh, mitigated!

-Russ

ETA: I just realized something: Welcome to the forums! Thank you for being part of the ~0.00001% of new users who actually followed the directions and used their real name as their Display Name!

[Andrew Broughton]

I mean, rings were super rare last century, too. As near as I can tell, the only widely-deployed system to use a physical ring topology is the PSTN's SS7. The only one I've ever seen in action is the (admittedly fairly brilliant) Optocore system that DiGiCo licenses.

Yamaha's Rivage TwinLANe and Console control networks are also ring topologies.

[Justice C. Bigler]

I'm standing up redundant Dante networks for a performing arts center.  The consultant who designed this wants both audio networks (Audio A and Audio B, aka Dante Primary & Secondary) physically configured in a ring topology (switch A to switch B to... ...switch J back to switch A).  Spanning tree isn't going to like this and is going to block an interface somewhere on each ring (network).  If someone connects a device (or maybe a portable cabinet with multiple wireless microphone receivers connected to small switches) to the A network, STP will have to go through the election process for root bridge and determine if there is now a network loop.  I imagine this could take several seconds.  My question is how Dante will behave when it sees that the A network is having an interruption.  Will audio continue to play on the B network?  I'm thinking that if there were only one audio network, audio might be interrupted for sure.  We've never done a full redundant setup like this so I don't know how it will behave.  Perhaps the Dante devices will see an issue with the A network and start playing the stream that they also received on the B network.  If an interruption does happen because of STP when connecting a device to network A, it seems like connecting the switches in the portable to network A and B at the same time would definitely cause an interruption to audio.  Any ideas?

Will you post the name and phone number of this idiot so that I can call him and ridicule him for being a total and complete moron?


That's not how Dante networks work and will produce a totally non functioning system.

[Scott Holtzman]

I mean, rings were super rare last century, too. As near as I can tell, the only widely-deployed system to use a physical ring topology is the PSTN's SS7. The only one I've ever seen in action is the (admittedly fairly brilliant) Optocore system that DiGiCo licenses. (Strangely, and despite the name, IBM's Token Ring network protocol doesn't actually use a ring topology at the physical layer.)


-Russ

ETA: I just realized something: Welcome to the forums! Thank you for being part of the ~0.00001% of new users who actually followed the directions and used their real name as their Display Name!

Russ - SS& in the US is a combination of associated signalling (A-links) between major switches and quasi associated using Signal Transfer Points (STP's) that run F links back to the CO.  Most A-links except in large spit tandem LATA's like NYC have been retired.


In any event it's not a ring network.  It is a hardened point to point, there always is another path (except when there is not and then shit breaks). 


I believe a lot of SS-7 has been layered in to IP now.  Interesting  mobile SMS uses the TCAP (a messenger function) to transport SMS messages and mobility management information (for automatic roaming), it was never designed for that Bell Labs just hacked it into the mobile switches and other vendors adopted then it became a ratified protocol.  GSM on the other hand, that doesn't use SS7 had formal link protocols for mobility management and test messaging.


With all that information you didn't want, I scratched my brain and SONET (a fiber ring topology, part of the national digital hierarchy) is a true ring network with healing.  It's basic speed goes all the way to OC-768 40Gb today.  OC is multiples of T1 1.54 carrier rates.  There isn't much switched circuit telephony anymore.  SONET transport remains ubiquitous at the carrier level for both packet and switched traffic.


Original token ring (before it used twisted pair) was absolutely a ring.  The token was a collision prevention system.  Only the node with token could talk.  MAU's were installed in a ring architecture then nodes (computers, terminals and printers) were hung off the MAU's.  The MAU's were the ring. 

[Russell Ault]

Russ - SS& in the US is a combination of associated signalling (A-links) between major switches and quasi associated using Signal Transfer Points (STP's) that run F links back to the CO.  Most A-links except in large spit tandem LATA's like NYC have been retired.

In any event it's not a ring network.  It is a hardened point to point, there always is another path (except when there is not and then shit breaks). 

I believe a lot of SS-7 has been layered in to IP now.  Interesting  mobile SMS uses the TCAP (a messenger function) to transport SMS messages and mobility management information (for automatic roaming), it was never designed for that Bell Labs just hacked it into the mobile switches and other vendors adopted then it became a ratified protocol.  GSM on the other hand, that doesn't use SS7 had formal link protocols for mobility management and test messaging.

With all that information you didn't want, I scratched my brain and SONET (a fiber ring topology, part of the national digital hierarchy) is a true ring network with healing.  It's basic speed goes all the way to OC-768 40Gb today.  OC is multiples of T1 1.54 carrier rates.  There isn't much switched circuit telephony anymore.  SONET transport remains ubiquitous at the carrier level for both packet and switched traffic.

Original token ring (before it used twisted pair) was absolutely a ring.  The token was a collision prevention system.  Only the node with token could talk.  MAU's were installed in a ring architecture then nodes (computers, terminals and printers) were hung off the MAU's.  The MAU's were the ring.

Well, I must be particularly tired today (I mean, I know I am, but it's clearly showing). I was doing background research using the Wikipedia article for "ring network" and I missed the fact that it has basically zero citations (and is also apparently rubbish).

We all make mistakes, and this one was mine. Sorry, everyone!

-Russ

[Tim Verhoeven]

I'm standing up redundant Dante networks for a performing arts center.  The consultant who designed this wants both audio networks (Audio A and Audio B, aka Dante Primary & Secondary) physically configured in a ring topology (switch A to switch B to... ...switch J back to switch A).  Spanning tree isn't going to like this and is going to block an interface somewhere on each ring (network).  If someone connects a device (or maybe a portable cabinet with multiple wireless microphone receivers connected to small switches) to the A network, STP will have to go through the election process for root bridge and determine if there is now a network loop.  I imagine this could take several seconds.  My question is how Dante will behave when it sees that the A network is having an interruption.  Will audio continue to play on the B network?  I'm thinking that if there were only one audio network, audio might be interrupted for sure.  We've never done a full redundant setup like this so I don't know how it will behave.  Perhaps the Dante devices will see an issue with the A network and start playing the stream that they also received on the B network.  If an interruption does happen because of STP when connecting a device to network A, it seems like connecting the switches in the portable to network A and B at the same time would definitely cause an interruption to audio.  Any ideas?

So yes, STP and Dante don't work together. Building rings also not the way to build a redundant Dante network. As other here has said, you build a star topology and making it redundant is done by doubling everything.
So you are actually creating 2 star topologies that are never interconnected, so no links between any of the network devices making up both topologies. Only the Dante end-clients (mixers, stageboxes, wireless microphones, laptops, ...) are connected to both networks. Of which one is designated the primary and the other the secondary. Make sure that all clients use the same network as the primary.

There will be not STP needed here, so no ports shutdown, no delays in connecting, etc. etc. Which is what Dante needs to work without interruptions.

The biggest downside of such a setup is of course cost, since everything needs to be doubled up. But it is the only way to assure a fully redundant (Dante) network. If you want to save money you can give up some of the redundancy by not doubling up the actual network devices (switches), but divide them virtually (using VLANs and other methods). But keep the redundant network connections. The idea here is that a switch on itself is less likely to fail then the cabling and connectors.

Another tip when building out a star Dante network is to try to keep the number of layers as limited as possible. Ideally you would only have 1 set of core switches forming the top layer and just a second layer of switches used to connect the clients (e.g. http://units.folder101.com/cisco/sem1/Notes/ch2-topologies/extendedstar.gif). But if you can get away without needing the second layer, even better!

[Aram Piligian]

I will say that I've carefully utilized rings with RSTP enabled for a couple of specific purposes.  We have a lot of the Martin Audio CDD-Live series speakers, which all utilize the Primary-only Ultimo chips.  For flown or ground stacked rigs that utilize a lot of daisy-chaining of the Primary, it can be handy to close the ring and have a slight bit of redundancy in the event that one of those links along the way gets broken.  Sometimes, it just makes more sense from a physical cabling perspective. 

Of course, this all requires having confidence in the switch config and testing to make sure it works the way it should, but I'll take the 2-6 second drop as RSTP reconverges if it keeps the rig running overall.

Getting back to OP's line of questioning--the Dante chips would recognize both Primary and Secondary ports on the same network and be Very Not Happy. Others have outlined the correct procedure.

[ProSoundWeb Community]