HDMI over Ethernet VLAN

[Trapid]

Morning,

 

I recently purchased a HDMI over Ethernet extender that work using TCP/IP (Same or similar to the ones in this link https://amzn.to/2D2VN91)

 

The devices themselves work perfectly no issues with quality or signal. The only problem I’m finding is that with them plugged in and transmitting the wired throughput of the network/internet drops significantly. The internet comes in at 200mbps with the devices unplugged full throughput is guaranteed, however with them plugged in the internet drops to around 80mbps all tested on speedtest.net.

 

After some light reading I setup a VLAN or at least thought I did to isolate the traffic from the rest of the network. Although it appears to be working somewhat (Internet speedtest of around 110mbps) it's still not back to the 200mbps or close that I’d be expecting. 

 

After my failed attempt above I made sure multicast was enabled etc and noticed the Auto Video-VLAN was picking up the traffic however still no improvement over my attempt above.

 

Is there something I’m missing here or are these the type of results I should have expected from the start? For reference the switch is a Netgear GS748T and both the transmitter and receiver are plugged into the same switch.

 

Cheers,

Richard

[Dujith]

Problem is that the device in question just floods every port as it does not know where its counterpart is and goes for a scattershot approach. 

Turning your switch in a hub  

 

How did you create the VLAN? the 2 ports should be set to untagged with their own VLAN (200 for example)

The rest of the ports should not be in the VLAN (tagged or untagged) or they will get flooded.

 

Edit: in case of the Netgear you should use port based VLAN for the 2 ports

[mynameisjuan]

8 hours ago, Dujith said:

Problem is that the device in question just floods every port as it does not know where its counterpart is and goes for a scattershot approach. 

Turning your switch in a hub  

  

Half duplex is what makes a hub a hub. Flooding is normal.

 

My only thoughts OP is that the multicast traffic is over taxing the switch.

[Trapid]

On 4/7/2019 at 11:37 AM, Dujith said:

Problem is that the device in question just floods every port as it does not know where its counterpart is and goes for a scattershot approach. 

Turning your switch in a hub  

 

How did you create the VLAN? the 2 ports should be set to untagged with their own VLAN (200 for example)

The rest of the ports should not be in the VLAN (tagged or untagged) or they will get flooded.

 

Edit: in case of the Netgear you should use port based VLAN for the 2 ports

I created the VLAN exactly as you described, 2 ports untagged on their own VLAN. No other VLANS setup on the switch apart from the one I created. 

I'll have another look at my configuration just incase by chance I missed something. If not then @mynameisjuan could be right and the multicast traffic is just too much for the switch which would be a shame!

[mynameisjuan]

7 hours ago, Trapid said:

. If not then @mynameisjuan could be right and the multicast traffic is just too much for the switch which would be a shame! 

The reason being is broadcast/multicast hits the CPU and most consumer switches cannot handle that load. Try scaling down your video feed ( if possible) and see if speed correspond.

[mtz_federico]

And why not connect both devices directly to each other bypassing the switch