Cisco 2940 switch set up - help needed

[savvypaul]

No success connecting the two?

I investigated the specs. They're not stackable.

An opportunity to have a forum pass round...

What do you mean by not stackable?

What are you trying to achieve?

Why on Earth would you want to combine more than 1 switch into a single IP address - in a home or small business environment?

If you mean that you think that they are not connectable to each other, then that is simply not true. The whole idea of switches is that you can have thousands of them at a single site, all interconnected - in a network.

For the usual 'audiophile' reason - someone who seemed to know what they were talking about, told me it was a good idea.

[Bencat57]

I investigated the specs. They're not stackable.

An opportunity to have a forum pass round...

What do you mean by not stackable?

What are you trying to achieve?

Why on Earth would you want to combine more than 1 switch into a single IP address - in a home or small business environment?

If you mean that you think that they are not connectable to each other, then that is simply not true. The whole idea of switches is that you can have thousands of them at a single site, all interconnected - in a network.

For the usual 'audiophile' reason - someone who seemed to know what they were talking about, told me it was a good idea.

They'll be telling you it's a good idea to place them on your lawn and dance round them every full moon next.

There's seems to be a lot of complete nonsense spoken about switches.

In this case, it could be a simple misunderstanding. Chinese whispers and all that.
And maybe they were talking about stacking in the physical sense (superstition / placebo?), as opposed to stacking in the combining into 1 IP address sense?

It's times like this that reminds me how wound-up Richard used to get when someone spouted a lot of bullshit about amplifiers.
For me it's similar when someone talks a load of about switches or computer networks.

[Lindsayt]

PS. I've now ordered a second Cisco switch to sit just in front of my streamer.

Is this what you meant by "stacking" your switches?

In which case, all you're trying to do is to create a home network with an additional switch. With one switch daisy chained off another.

Your 2940's will do this, barring a hardware fault, without any configuration whatsoever. *
All you need to do is power them on and connect them with Cat5 (or better) cables - with the patching cables being hot pluggable (and unpluggable).

So, to put it in pedantic terms:
1 x cat 5 cable connected from 1 x ethenet port on your router (yellow RJ45 ports on my router) to any port on your "core" switch. For convention use either the one on the far left or the far right.
1 x cat 5 cable connected from any available RJ45 port on your "core" switch to any available RJ45 port on your "satellite" (daisy chained) switch. For convention use the next available RJ45 ports on the far right.


For your PC's, printers, servers etc you can connect them to any of the available ethernet (probably yellow) ports on your router or any available RJ45 port on your switches.
And everything should work. You may have to be a little bit patient when you first switch any device on. But after a couple of minutes, everything should be working on the network and talking to everything else fine.

I use this exact same daisy chained topography with my Cisco switches in my home - as a means to distribute network connections around the house.

*On the really old Cisco switches they didn't have a feature called Auto-MDIX which allows either straight or crossover copper ethernet cables to be used for all connections. In the really old days we made copper inter switch connections via crossover cables which have different pin connections to standard "straight" cables. There's a very small chance you may need to use a crossover cable for the connection between your two 2940's.

[slinger]

Do you think, Lindsay, that somebody thinks that switches connected in series, as it were, act like "repeaters," and preserve the integrity of the signal over a whole 10-meter run?

[CN211276]

For whatever reason I have found that two switches are better than one, certainly where my system is concerned. IMO Rich of Network Acoustics knows what he is talking about. The literature which came with the Eno filter stated that two switches were required to get the best out of it, a diagram shows one near the router and the other close to the Eno. I was sceptical about this, but there was nothing to loose with the Cisco 2940 going for £19. I see high resolution streaming as an emerging science and having an open mind and ears has paid great dividends. Rich also advises that a short length of high quality Cat 8 cable between the second switch and the Eno is of benefit. The NA cable is too expensive so I turned to DH Labs, drawing on my very positive experiences with their USB and BNC cables.

The 1m length of DH labs ethernet cable arrived early yesterday and I was immediately struck by the quality of construction. It is quite stiff, thick and clearly well shielded with silver content, similar to the far more expensive AQ Vodka. It is certainly a considerable step up from the long length of Farnells Cat 8 between the two switches. (Short lengths of this cable connect the router and NAS to the Cisco 2960G). The build quality of the DH Labs cable also looks superior to the short length of cable attached to the Eno which connects to the streamer. When the music played what was immediately apparant was an increase in volume which I can't explain. I had previously been using the Farnells borrowed from the NAS 2960 connection. It is still early days, but the DH Labs cable is more than the icing on the cake following the addition of the second switch. I can detect an extra degree of seperation and smootheness. Will have to do more listening and allow for run in, but a short length of audiophile ethernet cable at the business end of a two switch set up definately seems worthwhile.

[CN211276]

Do you think, Lindsay, that somebody thinks that switches connected in series, as it were, act like "repeaters," and preserve the integrity of the signal over a whole 10-meter run?

I've been finding the whole audiophile switch set-up to be a world of

I'm quite happy to accept that there have been sonic differences with different switches and cables.

What I can't accept is quite a lot of the "reasoning" given for why one solution is better than another.

It's very clear that a lot of people don't understand IT Networks. And what Cisco business switches can and cannot do. Which is fair enough as it is a specialised field of work. Just look at the 1200 odd pages in 2 volumes in the official text books for the (CCNA) bottom level Cisco Certification exam. Although the stuff relevant to home networks could probably be covered in about 200 pages.

It seems that quite a few people think of IT networks in terms of analogue signals being passed around. They aren't.
As an example the electricity that forms the signal for a packet of information from the Network Storage device to the switch gets discarded when it reaches the switch. And the switch creates an entirely new electrical signal when it passes the packet on to a streaming PC.
Think of it as being like a railway line where the trains only ever travel between 2 stations. And all the passengers are cloned when they arrive at a station and the clones are put on an entirely different train for travel onto the next station.
Is it possible that some cockroaches jump from one train to the next without going through the cloning process? Either at the station or whilst trains are passing each other on adjacent lines? Yes, it's possible with a copper network. With a fibre network I don't see how it can happen.

To stretch the analogy, at the departure station the heights of all the passengers are added up and put on a sign at the back of the train. At the destination station the heights of all the passengers on arrival are added up and if they don't match the sign at the back of the train, the whole lot is dumped and a message is sent to the departure station, asking them to send the train again.


As for daisy chaining switches, in a business environment it's common to have a "core switch" which is connected to the routers and servers and other switches only. With end user PC's and printers being connected to switches that hang off the core switch.
For a home network, by all means, anyone is welcome to try having the same topography. There won't be any benefit from an IT point of view - in the vast majority of home networks. But if it makes a sonic improvement then that's great from an audiophile perspective. Especially if they only spent £20 trying it out.

[Bencat57]

I have been reading both this thread and the one on the Wam about this switch . The only reason I am involved and doing it is because the Cisco unit is so cheap and frankly if it does nothing then you can move it on and get your money back . I think I am stopping at the single switch per floor and will not be adding more .

Reading the detailed description of how an network works was also fun and gives me a better idea of what is actually happening rather than what i think is happening . I freely admit that this is not an area i know much about and have just used it rather than studied it.

My set up uses two Cisco Switches bit this is in a one per floor network rather than next to each other . Reading the above though I might still be doing it as noted just in a slightly different way . I have my router upstairs in a spare bedroom that I use for my PC and active music system and this is where I am now . My Router a TP-Link AC2800 VDSL/ADSL I use a Cat 6e cable from this to the first Cisco switch input at number eight . I then have my netgear powerline connected from output 1 on the Cisco and my MEdia Server connected to input 2 input 3 I use for my PC . This is the connection for upstairs.

Downstairs in my front room I have my AV system with an Onkyo AV receiver , Plusnet Freeview Box , Amazon Cube and 55 LG 4K TV . I have placed a second Cisco switch here (same model number but different in that it has a dedicated input leaving all eight outputs free) which is connected in by the netgear power line plugged in that room . All the above items are then connected using ethernet cables to the switch . Doing this was initially to stop drop outs and buffering issues in this set up on 4K programs on Amazon and movies . This has been achieved but there has also been an improvement in picture quality and sound quality . I do not think for one minute that the Cisco Switch has magic qualities it is just the simple thing that it is quieter and more efficient at getting the full signal to the end points . I am sure if I put any business quality switch in its place it would be the same . Having had a £20 TP-Link switch before the Cisco which failed for some unexplained reason I could see very easily and feel the huge difference in build quality and Cisco has an onboard PSU rather than depending on variable quality Wall Wart PSU's . While the PSU inside the Cisco may well be a simple switch mode the quality of the build and the quietness of the PSU will have been tested and worked on to ensure it meets specs way outside what I would need and this makes it a good quality switch to use at £25 delivered it is an easy and fuss free thing to buy and use .

[slinger]

Lindsay, would this be of use to anyone? https://try.netwrix.com/cisco-commands-cheatsheet_fb_uk

I'm sure they're just trying to flog something, and I also know a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but at least you could tell people to "refer to their textbooks," rather than having to explain everything.

[CN211276]

I have been re-reading the Wam reviews on the Eno filter and have a better idea why the addition of the second Cisco switch has resulted in such a jump in SQ. It seems to be because of its close location to the streamer. If this would be the case without the Eno filter, I dont know but would not think so. Are two Ciscos required, with one near the router, I don't know but at £19 there is nothing to loose. Technicalities and guess work aside I am more than happy with what is coming through the speakers with the Eno, second Cisco and 1m length of DH Labs ethernet at the business end.

[slinger]

Lindsay, would this be of use to anyone? https://try.netwrix.com/cisco-commands-cheatsheet_fb_uk

I'm sure they're just trying to flog something, and I also know a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but at least you could tell people to "refer to their textbooks," rather than having to explain everything.

Probably best would be if I posted up a basic config text file, with the bits that you'd change for a particular individual switch in red or bold italics or something.
For Cisco switches I could post a lightly modified version of the basic config we used to put on Prison switches back in 2007.
This should be considered a basic starter config for a home network.
Then - as I go through my CCNA textbooks I could add any modifications that I came across that I thought might be useful / more up to date.

Then it'd be a case of pointing you towards a youtube video showing you how to console into a switch, including things to watch out for when you first power on a factory fresh switch.
It's the sort of thing where you could teach someone the basics, face to face, in half an hour.

The guide you linked to would probably be OK. I've not downloaded it myself.
The Cisco online documentation is very good.