Optical Network Configurations

[jabbr]

On 3/19/2022 at 11:03 AM, ted_b said:

I am somewhat of a network idiot, so I apologize if this is a simple question but:

* Thanks to @jabbr and others here I bought, a year ago or so, a Miktrotik CSS610-8g-2s switch and love it!  However, as I now build my new audio room/HT with new audio or video devices (each one seemingly with its own LAN connection) I am running out of room on my switch.  I need a few more copper LAN ports (and could use an SFP port or two but only for future, not a deal breaker now..the two SFPs I have in the switch are fine for now).  Does Mikrotik (or anyone) make an add-on, or should I not do that and instead purchase the next larger Mikrotik?  Thanks

 

Different ways to do this. I have several switches in use at home.

 

1) my main Mellanox 100Gbe switch used for fiber

2) a legacy 10/1 Gbe SFP(+) switch which I use as a copper switch

 

3) a Mikrotik SFP(+) which I use in one of my audio areas

4) a TP-Link 10/1 SFP(+) which I use in my office ... my office has both a 100Gbe single-mode directly to my workstation as well as a 10Gbe which goes to my TP-Link and is a backhaul from my WiFI-6 router

5) WiFI-6 router

 

In your situation you can get a larger Copper switch and run that to your Mikrotik, or run 2 Mikrotik's from your router, or get a copper distribution switch and run lines to 2 Mikrotiks

 

In short, switches are designed to be connected to eachother to distrubute network connections.

 

There are several serious misconceptions:

1) more switches are better

2) more switches are worse

 

Both nonsense in a well designed network ... sorry to those would believe otherwise. Switches should be silent, black background. More black isn't blacker than black. Silent means silent. Any deviation from a silent black background is a problem in the network which can be fixed by getting and using the equipment as described.

[jabbr]

17 hours ago, dbastin said:

Oh, I see, maybe you are not as much a network idiot as you think.  I suggest separating the HT gear from the audio gear by using the same approach as I suggested - one switch for HT, one switch for audio.  it is my experience the noise from HT gear will diminish the audio if all is using the same switch (it is still a bit of a mystery why though).  And while the network experts will say a Cat 6 UTP will be adequate to isolate the two switches from one another, I am not so sure that is a noise free connection so using fibre will remove any doubt.

 

This is the optical network configuration thread. Optical networks do not pass noise. You can mix "HT" gear and audio gear on the same fiberoptic network without causing noise. If there is any doubt in this statement use 10 Gbe (or faster) switches but the statement applies.

[jabbr]

On 3/20/2022 at 11:51 AM, ted_b said:

@dbastinThanks but I've already separated hifi from rest of house, etc.  I run fiber to Fitlet2 NAA and fiber to HQP music server.   I'm simply asking how best to add copper ports from my CSS610 (audio/video room only) or just get larger Mikrotik.  Thx

 

The CSS610 is fanless, many larger 10Gbe switches have fans. If you daisychain with a cheap copper switch and its in or close to your audio area, then just be sure to power the copper switch with a (cheap) LPS.

[ted_b]

@jabbr thanks, yes both will be powered by el cheapo linear supplies, then plugged into a Topaz isolation transformer (didn't need it for the audio room; went with Puritan).

[dbastin]

11 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

This is the optical network configuration thread. Optical networks do not pass noise. You can mix "HT" gear and audio gear on the same fiberoptic network without causing noise. If there is any doubt in this statement use 10 Gbe (or faster) switches but the statement applies.

 

Agreed, however he asked for more RJ45.

To clarify, I suggested using fibre to connect the audio switch to the HT switch, and fibre to connect from these to the rest of the network.  What would probably be inferior (and thus the basis for my concern) is using copper cable to connect to both HT and audio from the same switch.

 

I will add though, if it is possible to connect to any HT or audio gear using wifi instead of copper cable, that also may reduce the cable connections from passing on noise and its impact from getting into the switches being distributed to other copper connections.

[jabbr]

13 hours ago, dbastin said:

 

Agreed, however he asked for more RJ45.

To clarify, I suggested using fibre to connect the audio switch to the HT switch, and fibre to connect from these to the rest of the network.  What would probably be inferior (and thus the basis for my concern) is using copper cable to connect to both HT and audio from the same switch.

 

I will add though, if it is possible to connect to any HT or audio gear using wifi instead of copper cable, that also may reduce the cable connections from passing on noise and its impact from getting into the switches being distributed to other copper connections.

 

It doesn't need to be complicated. All you need is a single optical connection from switch to the audio endpoint. The rest doesn't really matter as long as there aren't cheap wallwarts near the audio system.

 

As @ted_b mentions, isolating the audio area behind a Topaz or similar isolation transformer (I use Equitech as well as Topaz), is the coup de grace on preventing external noise from entering the audio area. 

[Mike Rubin]

I have searched through this 100 page thread and haven’t found anything that provides direct guidance on my inquiry, so I will just go ahead and ask.  Forgive me if the answers are elsewhere in the thread.

 

This is my network topography:  (1).  My xfi modem/router, my Synology NAS, my NUC, and the ultraRendu that is connected to my desktop DAC all are in my basement in proximity to one another.  (2).  The NAS and NUC are connected directly to the router with copper.  (3).  The ultraRendu is connected optically to a TrendNet FMC, which is connected by optical cable to a second TrendNet FMC, which is connected to the router by copper.  (4). The router is connected by CAT 6 to a wall plate and then by CAT 6 to the rest of the house through a 48 port Netgear switch in my garage.  (5).  The garage switch connects to my EtherRegen on the main floor by copper to the wall plate and then copper from the wall plate to the EtherRegen B side.  (6). The EtherRegen is connected to my Signature Rendu SE optically from the A side.

 

I am curious about expanding my use of optical in this network.  
 

I saw this at Amazon:  

 

https://www.amazon.com/MikroTik-Router-Gigabit-Ethernet-CRS106-1C-5S/dp/B01MZEDVCV/ref=sr_1_16?crid=296MBV2ZA2VKO&keywords=mikrotik+switch&qid=1648099943&s=electronics&sprefix=mikrotik+switch%2Celectronics%2C124&sr=1-16

 

It has 5 SFP cages plus a “combo” PoE/SFP.  It has occurred to me that I could connect this to my basement modem/router by copper and then connect the NAS, the NUC, and the ultraRendu optically to its SFP ports.  The two TrendNet FMC’s could be repurposed for the NAS and NUC and I have a Sonore Optical Module that I could repurpose for the ultraRendu.  I have a couple of spare SFP’s and some extra fiber cables that should be compatible.

 

One threshold issue is how I am going to have enough electrical outlets for all the power supplies, but I think I can work that out.  If I can, here are some specific questions that I have about this proposed setup:

 

(1).  Does this sort of configuration even make sense from a sound quality perspective for the basement ultraRendu and the living room Signature Rendu SE?  
 

The former still will have a run of copper from the Optical Module and the latter still will connect to the router over CAT 6 from router to garage switch to wall plate to EtherRegen.  With that much copper remaining in the system, I wonder how much benefit there would be from the proposed optical additions.
 

(2).  Assuming this is not a crazy idea, is this the right switch for the job?  I don’t see more than a couple of references to it on this forum, although the experts here seem to like Mikrotik products in general.  If it’s not a good solution, are there other switches with three or more SFP cages that I should consider instead?

 

(3).  Assuming this is not a crazy idea and that this is an okay switch, I wonder about powering the switch.  This is advertised as PoE capable.  However, I have neither PoE capability nor a desire to have it.  It looks from the photos, though, as though the switch instead can be powered by a 12v LPS.  Unfortunately, I can’t tell what amperage is required.  I have a 12v, 2A LPS I can dedicate to this application.  Is that likely to be a decent power source for a switch of this nature?

 

(4).  Any other potential or inevitable pitfalls of which I should be aware?  
 

Thanks for any information you can provide.

 

 

[dbastin]

2 hours ago, Mike Rubin said:

I have searched through this 100 page thread and haven’t found anything that provides direct guidance on my inquiry, so I will just go ahead and ask.  Forgive me if the answers are elsewhere in the thread.

 

This is my network topography:  (1).  My xfi modem/router, my Synology NAS, my NUC, and the ultraRendu that is connected to my desktop DAC all are in my basement in proximity to one another.  (2).  The NAS and NUC are connected directly to the router with copper.  (3).  The ultraRendu is connected optically to a TrendNet FMC, which is connected by optical cable to a second TrendNet FMC, which is connected to the router by copper.  (4). The router is connected by CAT 6 to a wall plate and then by CAT 6 to the rest of the house through a 48 port Netgear switch in my garage.  (5).  The garage switch connects to my EtherRegen on the main floor by copper to the wall plate and then copper from the wall plate to the EtherRegen B side.  (6). The EtherRegen is connected to my Signature Rendu SE optically from the A side.

 

I am curious about expanding my use of optical in this network.  
 

I saw this at Amazon:  

 

https://www.amazon.com/MikroTik-Router-Gigabit-Ethernet-CRS106-1C-5S/dp/B01MZEDVCV/ref=sr_1_16?crid=296MBV2ZA2VKO&keywords=mikrotik+switch&qid=1648099943&s=electronics&sprefix=mikrotik+switch%2Celectronics%2C124&sr=1-16

 

It has 5 SFP cages plus a “combo” PoE/SFP.  It has occurred to me that I could connect this to my basement modem/router by copper and then connect the NAS, the NUC, and the ultraRendu optically to its SFP ports.  The two TrendNet FMC’s could be repurposed for the NAS and NUC and I have a Sonore Optical Module that I could repurpose for the ultraRendu.  I have a couple of spare SFP’s and some extra fiber cables that should be compatible.

 

One threshold issue is how I am going to have enough electrical outlets for all the power supplies, but I think I can work that out.  If I can, here are some specific questions that I have about this proposed setup:

 

(1).  Does this sort of configuration even make sense from a sound quality perspective for the basement ultraRendu and the living room Signature Rendu SE?  
 

The former still will have a run of copper from the Optical Module and the latter still will connect to the router over CAT 6 from router to garage switch to wall plate to EtherRegen.  With that much copper remaining in the system, I wonder how much benefit there would be from the proposed optical additions.
 

(2).  Assuming this is not a crazy idea, is this the right switch for the job?  I don’t see more than a couple of references to it on this forum, although the experts here seem to like Mikrotik products in general.  If it’s not a good solution, are there other switches with three or more SFP cages that I should consider instead?

 

(3).  Assuming this is not a crazy idea and that this is an okay switch, I wonder about powering the switch.  This is advertised as PoE capable.  However, I have neither PoE capability nor a desire to have it.  It looks from the photos, though, as though the switch instead can be powered by a 12v LPS.  Unfortunately, I can’t tell what amperage is required.  I have a 12v, 2A LPS I can dedicate to this application.  Is that likely to be a decent power source for a switch of this nature?

 

(4).  Any other potential or inevitable pitfalls of which I should be aware?  
 

Thanks for any information you can provide.

In my experience that will achieve an improvement, it may be smallish but every incremental bit adds up.

 

In terms of a switch, consider CRS 305 or another SFP+.  Further, the CRS 's can be set up as router, which is what I do - its a bit tricky but I made instructions a few pages back. I have CRS 305 and it is hands down better than the Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X SFP I had because I gather the SFP+/10G spec is better than 1Gb. 

 

I also suggest try to connect to your Signature Rendu SE directly from the new switch/router rather than via the Netgear 48 port which might be passing on noise to your audio gear from many ports.  As I see it every bit of copper cod be collecting noise, so minimise the lengths of copper in the audio part of the network and instead use fibre of wifi.

 

You might find this

ISP > copper > ER or OM > fibre > router > fibre > UR SE

better than 

ISP > copper > Router > copper > ER or OM > fibre > UR SE

 

i presume your Cat 6 is UTP, theoretically that should be better than STP.

[dbastin]

On 3/23/2022 at 4:15 AM, jabbr said:

It doesn't need to be complicated. All you need is a single optical connection from switch to the audio endpoint. The rest doesn't really matter as long as there aren't cheap wallwarts near the audio system.

That is sensible for this guy who has a fibre capable endpoint.  Also, in my experience small gains can be made from tweaking upstream of fibre.

 

On 3/23/2022 at 4:15 AM, jabbr said:

As @ted_b mentions, isolating the audio area behind a Topaz or similar isolation transformer (I use Equitech as well as Topaz), is the coup de grace on preventing external noise from entering the audio area. 

LiFePO4 batteries would be very good too.

[Mike Rubin]

7 hours ago, dbastin said:

In my experience that will achieve an improvement, it may be smallish but every incremental bit adds up.

 

In terms of a switch, consider CRS 305 or another SFP+.  Further, the CRS 's can be set up as router, which is what I do - its a bit tricky but I made instructions a few pages back. I have CRS 305 and it is hands down better than the Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X SFP I had because I gather the SFP+/10G spec is better than 1Gb. 

 

I also suggest try to connect to your Signature Rendu SE directly from the new switch/router rather than via the Netgear 48 port which might be passing on noise to your audio gear from many ports.  As I see it every bit of copper cod be collecting noise, so minimise the lengths of copper in the audio part of the network and instead use fibre of wifi.

 

You might find this

ISP > copper > ER or OM > fibre > router > fibre > UR SE

better than 

ISP > copper > Router > copper > ER or OM > fibre > UR SE

 

i presume your Cat 6 is UTP, theoretically that should be better than STP.

Thanks for this. I am stuck with copper in the walls as I live in a 1925-built house with lath and plaster walls and I am not having those walls opened ever again for electrical work. It was costly and a mess when I had the house rewired and cabled two years ago. I regret not running optical then, but I wasn't even aware of its existence at the time.  I could bypass the switch in the garage wall box for an individual connection to the router, but I still would be keeping the EtherRegen in the signal path because I need the conversion to optical somewhere before the rendu.  The EtherRegen seems to do a good job of minimizing upstream noise. 

 

I had a separate modem and router before xfinity lent me their xfi box, which isn't that easy to bridge, and I need wifi capability for IOT and other devices without ethernet capability.  I have ubiquiti access points on each floor but a couple of devices either need or prefer a wifi connection at the router. A simple switch makes more sense to me than dealing with a replacement router, not that the xfi router doesn't have the weirdest gui ever developed for a router. 

[dbastin]

8 hours ago, Mike Rubin said:

Thanks for this. I am stuck with copper in the walls as I live in a 1925-built house with lath and plaster walls and I am not having those walls opened ever again for electrical work. It was costly and a mess when I had the house rewired and cabled two years ago. I regret not running optical then, but I wasn't even aware of its existence at the time.  I could bypass the switch in the garage wall box for an individual connection to the router, but I still would be keeping the EtherRegen in the signal path because I need the conversion to optical somewhere before the rendu.  The EtherRegen seems to do a good job of minimizing upstream noise. 

 

I had a separate modem and router before xfinity lent me their xfi box, which isn't that easy to bridge, and I need wifi capability for IOT and other devices without ethernet capability.  I have ubiquiti access points on each floor but a couple of devices either need or prefer a wifi connection at the router. A simple switch makes more sense to me than dealing with a replacement router, not that the xfi router doesn't have the weirdest gui ever developed for a router. 

Hmm, in that case I suggest ...

 

ISP > copper > Router > copper > CRS SFP+/10G switch > copper > ER > fibre > SR SE

 

Also connect NAS, NUC and ultrarendu to the new switch.

 

Here in Australia there is no need for a modem, the ISP comes via a national broadband network (nbn) to a proprietary connection box (I assume it is like a modem) into which the router connects.  In my case it actually looks like this, with the italics outside my control ...

 

exchange > fibre > nbn box > copper > ER > 10m fibre > CRS SFP+ router > copper > server built in switch > copper > wifi > endpoint.

 

The ER rocks where I have it.  What is puzzling is that I can detect when I change the copper from nbn box to ER .. even with fibre, ERs MOAT and wifi in the series.  It is small but not hard to hear.  Go figure!?

[Mike Rubin]

4 hours ago, dbastin said:

Hmm, in that case I suggest ...

 

ISP > copper > Router > copper > CRS SFP+/10G switch > copper > ER > fibre > SR SE

 

Also connect NAS, NUC and ultrarendu to the new switch.

 

 

This is what I visualized in my post, except that I proposed using the inexpensive CRS 106 rather than the CRS 305.  Not sure that I can see a functionality difference between the two Mikrotik products beyond the 305 being bootable into a switch OS, which seems more bespoke than the router OS for my use case….Do you know how these products differ?

[dbastin]

31 minutes ago, Mike Rubin said:

This is what I visualized in my post, except that I proposed using the inexpensive CRS 106 rather than the CRS 305.  Not sure that I can see a functionality difference between the two Mikrotik products beyond the 305 being bootable into a switch OS, which seems more bespoke than the router OS for my use case….Do you know how these products differ?

I am really just following observations made by many others here on this thread about the benefits of SFP+/10G v SFP/1G.  The difference is not about comparing their functionality.  In short, and I am sure others can explain better, the specifications for the SFP+/10G is much higher standards which also happens to benefit audio (think clock quality, jitter, noise, etc).

 

I was using Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X SFP (1G), which by all accounts is quite good benefits for audio use, and did a straight swap to install the CRS 305 in its place.  Cold, with say only an hour of prior use while I configured it, the improvement was far in excess of the price difference.  I have spent lots more on other ethernet things that made much less difference.  For instance, adding the ER upstream instead of a generic FMC, or downstream for that matter, in my situation made much less difference.

 

Others here are using other CRS with copper and SFP+ ports.  It is no coincidence that AfterDark and others consider industrial grade SFP+ modules to sound best.

[Mike Rubin]

1 hour ago, dbastin said:

I am really just following observations made by many others here on this thread about the benefits of SFP+/10G v SFP/1G.  The difference is not about comparing their functionality.  In short, and I am sure others can explain better, the specifications for the SFP+/10G is much higher standards which also happens to benefit audio (think clock quality, jitter, noise, etc).

 

I was using Ubiquiti EdgeRouter X SFP (1G), which by all accounts is quite good benefits for audio use, and did a straight swap to install the CRS 305 in its place.  Cold, with say only an hour of prior use while I configured it, the improvement was far in excess of the price difference.  I have spent lots more on other ethernet things that made much less difference.  For instance, adding the ER upstream instead of a generic FMC, or downstream for that matter, in my situation made much less difference.

 

Others here are using other CRS with copper and SFP+ ports.  It is no coincidence that AfterDark and others consider industrial grade SFP+ modules to sound best.

Thanks.  I was just planning on reusing old SFP modules if I went this route, but it sounds as though I need to invest in SFP+ to get the best from it.  Down another wallet-emptying rathole. :)

[Quokka_61]

@Mike Rubin Without precisely understanding what your network topology exactly looks like, one observation. I recently acquired a MikroTik CRS305-1G-4S+ switch, and it is my understanding that its 1G ethernet port is for management purposes only. Connecting this switch over ethernet directly with my router indeed makes it possible to access the switch and fiddle with its rather intimidating array of settings, either by configuring it in SwOS or RouterOS. However, when I hook up the ethernet port of the MikroTik to an ethernet port of any of my other switches, no connection is made and hence the former doesn't become part of the network. Others may have different experiences, but for me this particular MikroTik only works as a fiber switch, and I thought this is probably something you should be aware of.

[Johnnydev]

6 hours ago, dbastin said:

Hmm, in that case I suggest ...

 

ISP > copper > Router > copper > CRS SFP+/10G switch > copper > ER > fibre > SR SE

 

Also connect NAS, NUC and ultrarendu to the new switch.

 

Here in Australia there is no need for a modem, the ISP comes via a national broadband network (nbn) to a proprietary connection box (I assume it is like a modem) into which the router connects.  In my case it actually looks like this, with the italics outside my control ...

 

exchange > fibre > nbn box > copper > ER > 10m fibre > CRS SFP+ router > copper > server built in switch > copper > wifi > endpoint.

 

The ER rocks where I have it.  What is puzzling is that I can detect when I change the copper from nbn box to ER .. even with fibre, ERs MOAT and wifi in the series.  It is small but not hard to hear.  Go figure!?

The ER rocks where I have it.  What is puzzling is that I can detect when I change the copper from nbn box to ER .. even with fibre, ERs MOAT and wifi in the series.  It is small but not hard to hear.  Go figure!?
 

i have exact the same experiences overhere!

[Mike Rubin]

30 minutes ago, Quokka_61 said:

@Mike Rubin Without precisely understanding what your network topology exactly looks like, one observation. I recently acquired a MikroTik CRS305-1G-4S+ switch, and it is my understanding that its 1G ethernet port is for management purposes only. Connecting this switch over ethernet directly with my router indeed makes it possible to access the switch and fiddle with its rather intimidating array of settings, either by configuring it in SwOS or RouterOS. However, when I hook up the ethernet port of the MikroTik to an ethernet port of any of my other switches, no connection is made and hence the former doesn't become part of the network. Others may have different experiences, but for me this particular MikroTik only works as a fiber switch, and I thought this is probably something you should be aware of.

Thanks. I was wondering about the reference to “regular traffic forwarding“ on the MikroTik product page:  https://mikrotik.com/product/crs305_1g_4s_in

 

That suggested to me that, if this were connected by copper to a router, it could be used for network access by any device connected to an FMC.  Your experience suggests otherwise.

 

 I remain confused about something else:  I have plain-Jane TrendNet FMC’s that I was going to reuse in this application but they are SFP, not SFP+, and only 1 gb.  Are there comparable 10gb FMC’s that can use SFP+ modules?  I am not finding them for sale.

[dbastin]

33 minutes ago, Mike Rubin said:

Thanks.  I was just planning on reusing old SFP modules if I went this route, but it sounds as though I need to invest in SFP+ to get the best from it.  Down another wallet-emptying rathole. :)

I gather from my reading that in many cases SFP can be used in SFP+.  I am just using SFP modules, so far.  Actually I have speed turned down to 100Mbps, it ocassionally stalls so may need to increase that to eliminate interruptions.

[R1200CL]

1 hour ago, Mike Rubin said:

Thanks.  I was just planning on reusing old SFP modules if I went this route, but it sounds as though I need to invest in SFP+ to get the best from it.  Down another wallet-emptying rathole. :)

I really don’t think so. There is no unified reports that SFP+ sounds better. We have a possible theory that it may do, cause of certain eye pattern testing proves better phase noise. But I think it’s more complex than that. 

No need to purchase expensive SFP+ modules. And you will also face other issues, as you have to make sure they are working in 1 GHz  as intended with the 1421 module. (Yes, the 1375 normally do). 
 

There are reports that some SFP modules sounds different from others. Especially MM vs SM. Others has different laser technologies. 

[dbastin]

2 hours ago, Quokka_61 said:

MikroTik CRS305-1G-4S+ switch, and it is my understanding that its 1G ethernet port is for management purposes only.

On my CRS 305 using RouterOS the RJ45 jack works as a regular ethernet connection.

 

2 hours ago, Johnnydev said:

i have exact the same experiences overhere!

Good to know I am not just hearing imaginary tnings.

 

2 hours ago, Mike Rubin said:

I have plain-Jane TrendNet FMC’s that I was going to reuse in this application but they are SFP, not SFP+, and only 1 gb.  Are there comparable 10gb FMC’s that can use SFP+ modules?

I gave up search, the rare one's I found cost more than CRS 305.  I gather it is possible to use 1G FMCs connected to a 10G switch, there are settings for that.

 

1 hour ago, R1200CL said:

I really don’t think so. There is no unified reports that SFP+ sounds better. We have a possible theory that it may do, cause of certain eye pattern testing proves better phase noise. But I think it’s more complex than that. 

No need to purchase expensive SFP+ modules. And you will also face other issues, as you have to make sure they are working in 1 GHz  as intended with the 1421 module. (Yes, the 1375 normally do). 
 

There are reports that some SFP modules sounds different from others. Especially MM vs SM. Others has different laser technologies. 

Check out what AfterDark Audio) (threads on AS and their website)  and Taiko and its user have to say .. try whatsbestforum.

[Quokka_61]

2 hours ago, dbastin said:

On my CRS 305 using RouterOS the RJ45 jack works as a regular ethernet connection.

 

In that case, my apologies for disseminating erroneous information.

 

@dbastin If I may ask, did the RJ45 port work for you right from the start, or did you need to change settings in RouterOS? Like I wrote, when I connected the ethernet port of my CRS305 to a ditto port of another switch, no connection was established. After reading in the manual that the RJ45 port of the MikroTik was meant for switch management, my conclusion was that no normal switch-to-switch traffic over this port was possible. Reading it is, is good news, and so I have some more troubleshooting to do this weekend to have this port work for me as well.

[dbastin]

27 minutes ago, Quokka_61 said:

 

In that case, my apologies for disseminating erroneous information.

 

@dbastin If I may ask, did the RJ45 port work for you right from the start, or did you need to change settings in RouterOS? Like I wrote, when I connected the ethernet port of my CRS305 to a ditto port of another switch, no connection was established. After reading in the manual that the RJ45 port of the MikroTik was meant for switch management, my conclusion was that no normal switch-to-switch traffic over this port was possible. Reading it is, is good news, and so I have some more troubleshooting to do this weekend to have this port work for me as well.

Out of the box was RouterOS.  It was some time ago so I am not sure if I changed something to achieve it and don't recall all the settings I changed.

 

I have avoided looking at RouterOS ever since.  But when I get some patience I will go in to change the speed at the risk of clumsily stuffing something else up. 

 

Edit

My post on page 97 has photos of settings that might be a clue ... ports and interfaces could be the solution, and I recall sometimes 2 settings are needed to change what naively seems one thing.

[sandston]

dBastin

Am I reading your post correctly? Are you saying you felt you achieved better sound by adding a Microtik 305 upstream of your Etheregen than daisy chaining two Etheregens? Based on cost and of course availability of the Etheregen I am certain I am not alone in want ting to hear more. Can any other members share similar 305 experience?

[Mike Rubin]

Thanks, gents, but now I am completely confused. It sounds as though the 305 can work as a simple switch with a copper connection to the network, but I now have no idea what why its SFP+ capability makes a difference in this application. Are SFP+ devices "better" for SQ when only running SFP connections? As I mentioned, I was planning to use SFP modules and FMC's that already are on hand.

[barrows]

5 hours ago, Mike Rubin said:

Thanks, gents, but now I am completely confused. It sounds as though the 305 can work as a simple switch with a copper connection to the network, but I now have no idea what why its SFP+ capability makes a difference in this application. Are SFP+ devices "better" for SQ when only running SFP connections? As I mentioned, I was planning to use SFP modules and FMC's that already are on hand.

Mike:  The theory behind using an SFP+ capable switch, is that because it is capable of running at 10 Gb speeds, it will have a more precise clock, and better signal integrity, even when running at only 1 Gb speed.  The better signal integrity and better clock are (theoretically) necessary to meet the 10 Gb specification.  Now, no one has ever actually confirmed this through any measurement, and no one has exposed what kind of clock the Microtik switch in question is running (and I would be willing to bet that the clock in the Microtik is not as good as what is in, say, the etherRegen, or Sonore products).  So it is up to the buyer to experiment in their own system, and determine if this switch offers any advantage for them.