Ethernet Switch- what's the point?

@thyname  yeah, you are right. I thought he was the founder for some reason. 

 

However, doesn't change anything, search for John Swenson and leakage current (made up term) on audiophilstyles (can't post links to that site or your post are removed)

@12many i know, that is not the point, the point is to counter all these people are telling people to spends thousands on dollars on things that doesn’t work. So hopefully people don’t go wasting their money. 

@recklesskelly i dont care about you, that is correct. I care about the op and future people who want to learn. And being told that a $3k Innuos switch is the way to go is not helpful to anyone. 

@tonix HTTPS is used for most, if not all, streaming services over the internet. That is all that matters. I showed that Qobuz uses https, proving your “logic” invalid.

switches and cables don’t make a difference (after a certain point). 

@carlsbad2  @tonix 

Here's a pcap show you are 100% wrong:

 

 

09:35:23.282276 IP 10.255.255.126.52413 > ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https: Flags [P.], seq 606480072:606480227, ack 1691056063, win 2070, options [nop,nop,TS val 4083356658 ecr 4217534470], length 155

09:35:23.282300 IP 10.255.255.126.52413 > ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https: Flags [P.], seq 155:201, ack 1, win 2070, options [nop,nop,TS val 4083356658 ecr 4217534470], length 46

09:35:23.410880 IP ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https > 10.255.255.126.52413: Flags [.], ack 201, win 189, options [nop,nop,TS val 4217560179 ecr 4083356658], length 0

09:35:23.411236 IP ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https > 10.255.255.126.52413: Flags [P.], seq 1:47, ack 201, win 189, options [nop,nop,TS val 4217560179 ecr 4083356658], length 46

09:35:23.411250 IP 10.255.255.126.52413 > ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https: Flags [.], ack 47, win 2069, options [nop,nop,TS val 4083356786 ecr 4217560179], length 0

09:35:23.525859 IP ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https > 10.255.255.126.52413: Flags [P.], seq 47:964, ack 201, win 189, options [nop,nop,TS val 4217560295 ecr 4083356658], length 917

09:35:23.525862 IP ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https > 10.255.255.126.52413: Flags [P.], seq 964:1002, ack 201, win 189, options [nop,nop,TS val 4217560295 ecr 4083356658], length 38

09:35:23.525884 IP 10.255.255.126.52413 > ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https: Flags [.], ack 964, win 2056, options [nop,nop,TS val 4083356901 ecr 4217560295], length 0

09:35:23.525893 IP 10.255.255.126.52413 > ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https: Flags [.], ack 1002, win 2055, options [nop,nop,TS val 4083356901 ecr 4217560295], length 0

09:35:23.531732 IP 10.255.255.126.52413 > ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https: Flags [P.], seq 201:305, ack 1002, win 2070, options [nop,nop,TS val 4083356907 ecr 4217560295], length 104

09:35:23.691822 IP ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https > 10.255.255.126.52413: Flags [.], ack 305, win 189, options [nop,nop,TS val 4217560462 ecr 4083356907], length 0

09:35:23.752906 IP ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https > 10.255.255.126.52413: Flags [.], seq 1002:2450, ack 305, win 189, options [nop,nop,TS val 4217560523 ecr 4083356907], length 1448

09:35:23.752921 IP 10.255.255.126.52413 > ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https: Flags [.], ack 2450, win 2048, options [nop,nop,TS val 4083357128 ecr 4217560523], length 0

09:35:23.752951 IP ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https > 10.255.255.126.52413: Flags [.], seq 2450:3898, ack 305, win 189, options [nop,nop,TS val 4217560523 ecr 4083356907], length 1448

09:35:23.752953 IP ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https > 10.255.255.126.52413: Flags [.], seq 3898:5346, ack 305, win 189, options [nop,nop,TS val 4217560523 ecr 4083356907], length 1448

09:35:23.752954 IP ec2-63-34-141-147.eu-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com.https > 10.255.255.126.52413: Flags [.], seq 5346:6794, ack 305, win 189, options [nop,nop,TS val 4217560523 ecr 4083356907], length 1448

 

Log from my firewall:

Source

10.255.255.126

Destination

63.34.141.147

Service

HTTPS

Protocol

TCP (6)

Destination Port

443

Source Port

52413

Description

OCSP: could not connect to server. Make sure the server is up and running. Certificate DN: 'qobuz.com' Requested Server Name: www.qobuz.com. See sk159872

And before you say you don't understand pcaps, yeah, that is the whole point. So stop lying.

Why do I call it lying? Because you have been told over and over again what the reality is, and you continue deliberately, willfully and intentionally spew the same garbage.

@cleeds you mean like you did when you entered this thread? Question still remains, why do you fill up the forums with easily verifiable false statements?

@yoyoyaya  It's not an authority fallacy, it's simply basic facts. However, not everyone understand these facts, but they want to portray themselves as have an understanding. 

Take the example of John Swenson, founder of UpTone and designer of Etherregen. He was forced to admit that he made up terms, terms that does not mean anything, for his intended customer base with the Etherregen. Why forced, because he was confronted by actual engineers.

So again, a switch cannot improve anything, this is a basic fact. A really good switch doesn't add too much latency, no jitter, or packet loss, while a bad switch introduces lots of bad things. Luckily, most $30 switches are more than capable to handle most residential applications. 

@yoyoyaya Well, Occam's razor applies. If there is not way a switch can improve anything, which is a fact and how Ethernet and TCP/IP is designed, guess what is the next option?

@carlsbad2 This is where you go every time you get actually proof of how things work. Can you just stop spewing the garbage you normally do, since it is only lies?

@macg19 nope. Not at all. Qobuz, tidal and Roon use HTTPS, stateful and encrypted.

@yoyoyaya yeah, people waste money to satisfy their confirmation bias.

@carlsbad2 nope. Not how it works.

sure, there are some legacy business applications that still use ftp internally to an organization, however 99.99% use HTTPS for everything. And Qobuz, Tidal and others also use HTTPS. We go through this every time….

A quick primer on HTTPS, it is build on top of TCP, which delivers error free transmissions, and it is encrypted, which means that if you lost one packet, which TCP prevents, you wouldn’t be able to decrypt.

@tonix no, they do not. Qobuz, tidal and others use HTTPS. It is so easy to check, so it is ridiculous that you and other lie about this all the time.

@tonix Qobuz uses HTTPS as shown above.

zoom, WebEx, teams also use HTTPS. That Wikipedia is a generic overview that doesn’t go into specifics regarding services like Qobuz, it does however mention that HTTP transport to overcome lots of issues that real time protocols run into over the internet.

Pro audio and video however use real time protocols and absolutely no crap Etherregens or other snake oil switches. But pro audio and video are on low latency, very high speed private networks, and not over the internet.

@cleeds  I was wondering when you would show up, you and @carlsbad2  are in the same boat, you think you know things, but you really don't, but you continue to argue. Why? You really have nothing better than fill up forums with garbage that is completely, easily verifiably wrong?

@carlsbad2 you are always wrong, so there is a reason to my disagreement. 
 

since you think that Qobuz and others uses stateless protocols, post a pcap proving your point. 

@thyname yeah, that’s the plan

@yoyoyaya and we are back to bias.

the facts of how a switch works doesn’t change. It is not an intelligent device that can make decisions based on what is transported via the switch. 

@nonoise you are misrepresenting what happened. You made a bunch of claims and linked to a guy building his own RF detection device and claimed this guy was a genius and knows everything about RF. I pointed out to you that EMI/RF devices cost $20 on Amazon, and this guy didn’t know anything more than average Joe. 
then you went on to post a bunch of links that contradicted your claims, a while stating that they support your claims, and finally you admitted you actually have no knowledge of the subject at hand. For which I give you kudos, no one else has admitted in the face of facts that they actually don’t know anything.

but you are correct in that I have tried a few Ethernet cables, I still have one in my box of cables, and I have tired the etherregen. I also said why I tried, which was there is no way these should work, what am I missing? 

@recklesskelly  people are literally saying to spend thousands of dollars in the thread…

thanks for your comment on my grammar, it matters a lot. 

@recklesskelly so no one told op to spend money huh? No one?