[Luvdac]

The LHY FMC just arrived. The fmc works perfectly fine. It immediately recognized my router and received the signal from the router and showed a solid blue light the moment it was connected. I hooked back up the SW-10 into the system and it functions normally with the sfp connection as noted before. No drops in connections. There seems to be something wrong with the ethernet portion of the device on the SW-10. I'm still using the same lan cables as before into the fmc and out of the SW-10. I think the Cisco board on the SW-10 may be faulty.


Edit:
Wow nevermind. Even with the sw10 connected to fiber with the fmc, the sw10 STILL lost connection. So pretty much everything on the SW-10 is nonfunctioning.

Hi, I have the sw6 clocked by the ock2. The sw6 is connected via ethernet to jcat net card xe. I have no issues there, BUT.... I had similar issues like what you are describing with the cisco meraki switch preceding the sw6. ( they are cascaded), the ciso would lose the connection after a minute or two. I solved it by:
A) switching off the culprit switch (and any preceding switches) and removing the sfp module From the culprit switch.
B) switch on all switches simultaneously and then reinsert the sfp module into the problem switch.
This solved the issue for my cisco.
Hope it works for you.

 

[Tubewin]

Hi, I have the sw6 clocked by the ock2. The sw6 is connected via ethernet to jcat net card xe. I have no issues there, BUT.... I had similar issues like what you are describing with the cisco meraki switch preceding the sw6. ( they are cascaded), the ciso would lose the connection after a minute or two. I solved it by:
A) switching off the culprit switch (and any preceding switches) and removing the sfp module From the culprit switch.
B) switch on all switches simultaneously and then reinsert the sfp module into the problem switch.
This solved the issue for my cisco.
Hope it works for you.

Most of the issues I had was without the sfp module inserted, mainly using ethernet cables. It doesn’t work with fiber as well. I’ve tried everything already and I’ve thrown in the towel with this unit. Thank you for your suggestion.

 

[OCC7N]

Did you try the management app?

 

[sajunky]

Did you try the management app?

No MAC address, no IP, it is a dumb switch. See this response.

 

[Tubewin]

No MAC address, no IP, it is a dumb switch. See this response.

That is correct, there was no mac address on the unit at all. The sticker had a serial number, model, and the voltage.

 

[Jake2]

That is correct, there was no mac address on the unit at all. The sticker had a serial number, model, and the voltage.

I seem to recall reading or hearing somewhere, though couldn't find it with a quick google, that the LHY switches intentionally do not provide managed switch functionality even if the original Cisco etc board did. To keep things simple, reduce user config errors/support request IIRC. Might have been on one of Alvin's YT vids. Pretty sure - if not 100% - I didn't imagine this.

 

[Tubewin]

I seem to recall reading or hearing somewhere, though couldn't find it with a quick google, that the LHY switches intentionally do not provide managed switch functionality even if the original Cisco etc board did. To keep things simple, reduce user config errors/support request IIRC. Might have been on one of Alvin's YT vids. Pretty sure - if not 100% - I didn't imagine this.

I don't mind not having a mac address. I just need the unit to work xD.

 

[sajunky]

I don't mind not having a mac address. I just need the unit to work xD.

I understand. However those who do firmware modifications must do it properly. Making such device anynomous on the network can collide with Cisco expensions. Stripping out these extensions is not enough, they must be replaced with standard compliant routines.

Did you, BTW limit link speed to 100Mbps as suggested? It would hopefully remove a problem with latency optimisation which require a feedback from the other side. No identity, no feedback.

 

[Tubewin]

I understand. However those who do firmware modifications must do it properly. Making such device anynomous on the network can collide with Cisco expensions. Stripping out these extensions is not enough, they must be replaced with standard compliant routines.

Did you, BTW limit link speed to 100Mbps as suggested? It would hopefully remove a problem with latency optimisation which require a feedback from the other side. No identity, no feedback.

Not sure, but it shouldn't be this complicated for a switch to connect to your router. The etherregen is a 100mbps device, and has no problem connecting to my router or my pc, so I don't think link speed has anything to do with this situation. The LHY FMC also doesn't have any issue whatsoever connecting to my router and etherregen.

 

[Jake2]

Not sure, but it shouldn't be this complicated for a switch to connect to your router. The etherregen is a 100mbps device, and has no problem connecting to my router or my pc, so I don't think link speed has anything to do with this situation. The LHY FMC also doesn't have any issue whatsoever connecting to my router and etherregen.

Can I suggest, if you haven't already, trying the LHY FMC at the end of the chain after the EtherRegen directly feeding your network card. Ie. Router > ER > fibre > LHY FMC > JCAT. Pretty sure the ER works in both directions, so although this might seem back to front for the ER it should work. If this works seamlessly it'll demonstrate even more clearly to Beatechnik the SW-10 is the problem factor in all scenarios.

 

[Tubewin]

Can I suggest, if you haven't already, trying the LHY FMC at the end of the chain after the EtherRegen directly feeding your network card. Ie. Router > ER > fibre > LHY FMC > JCAT. Pretty sure the ER works in both directions, so although this might seem back to front for the ER it should work. If this works seamlessly it'll demonstrate even more clearly to Beatechnik the SW-10 is the problem factor in all scenarios.

Interesting. I thought the fmc could only be used in front of the router, since it is taking in signal from the ethernet and sending it out through fiber. Do you think the ethernet port from the fmc could also send out to the jcat card?

 

[sajunky]

Not sure, but it shouldn't be this complicated for a switch to connect to your router. The etherregen is a 100mbps device, and has no problem connecting to my router or my pc, so I don't think link speed has anything to do with this situation. The LHY FMC also doesn't have any issue whatsoever connecting to my router and etherregen.

You don't understand latency optimisation which I tried to explain, it is why there is such argumentation. It is either you will try (which was also suggested by other member and provide feedback to the supplier) or you just want to return a product. Plain and simple.

I wouldn't care about limitations if I get it working reliable and it sounds good.

 

[Tubewin]

You don't understand latency optimisation which I tried to explain, it is why there is such argumentation. It is either you will try (which was also suggested by other member and provide feedback to the supplier) or you just want to return a product. Plain and simple.

I wouldn't care about limitations if I get it working reliable and it sounds good.

I said I was returning it....

 

[Tubewin]

You don't understand latency optimisation which I tried to explain, it is why there is such argumentation. It is either you will try (which was also suggested by other member and provide feedback to the supplier) or you just want to return a product. Plain and simple.

I wouldn't care about limitations if I get it working reliable and it sounds good.

And with all due respect, I spent 15-16 hours over a 4 day period trying to get it to work. I hope it would be easy to see why I'm not keen on continuing to tinker with this particular unit.

 

[Jake2]

Interesting. I thought the fmc could only be used in front of the router, since it is taking in signal from the ethernet and sending it out through fiber. Do you think the ethernet port from the fmc could also send out to the jcat card?

Yes, should work in both directions, it is (as I understand it) fundamentally a switch after all, albeit one with just two ports - both the RJ45 and SFP ports will have send and receive data so I think it must logically be indifferent to the source and direction of traffic, it'll just pass packets to the IPs they're addressed to in the local network.

Indeed I'd expect many purchasers of the LHY FMC to use it to feed their streamer/server with a cheaper FMC upstream.

Give it a go, and see if it works consistently and then how it compares to the ER. Might need some burn-in, time for the OCXO to stabilise of course.