Re: Gear you HATE

171
Geiginni wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 8:10 pm
biscuitdough wrote: Wed Aug 09, 2023 7:44 pm As the campus firewall engineer, how do I convince a donkey of an AV guy to spend time migrating his Extron stuff to the dedicated network for it, rather than forcing me to deal with it on my user networks? He is now trying to buy a bunch of Dante shit.
I have very serious conversations early on with the IT infrastructure, IT systems, and IT-Sec team members, along with AV.

Not everyone should be putting their AV on the Enterprise. In fact, most client orgs should NOT be putting their AV on the enterprise. The number of moves/adds/changes and updates that occur on the enterprise do not bode well for stable AV systems. Trying to smash AV onto the enterprise usually results in pissed-off users and AV and IT teams that can't figure out what's going on and just spending time pointing the finger at each other.

We specify a lot of Netgear M4250 and M4300 switch hardware to alleviate the enterprise IT guys from having to set up and program (and maintain) standardized switches to run the protocols we require, along with figuring out VLAN allocations that will maintain port-to-port bandwidth and backplane requirements. It shouldn't fall on you guys to have to figure out where the IGMP querier should be, what multicast ports need to subscribe to which endpoints, or why your Dante, control and AV-over-IP networks shouldn't be converged on the same hardware.

The only shit that needs to touch the enterprise are the OOB ports on the AV switches that need to pass thru remote monitoring/management functions. In fact most Extron shit has air-gapped NICs for precisely this function (using GVE and GCP), and services that need access to the guest Wi-Fi for things like assistive listening (anyone not using Wi-Fi based ALS is living in the past), wireless presentation and collaboration, and Port 80 (amongst some others) to allow user-access to services outside the firewall.

We typically specify three separate stand-alone (or VLANed) AV networks in our projects: AV-over-IP, on smaller 1G PoE++ stackable switches with 10 or 40 GB SFPs to serve time-critical video and AV signal routing/transport; and larger 1GBE PoE+ switches with 10 GB SFPs to serve Dante VLAN and a separate Control VLAN. Switches get OOB ports that go to the enterprise (along with the aforementioned ALS, wireless presentation, and any other cloud-dependent user services).

We like to keep AV-over-IP and Dante separate as there are management pieces and tech-user flexibility that allows things to remain easier to manage if they're not operating alongside other network traffic (things like Dante Controller and Dante Domain Mgr, Extron NAVigator, Crestron NVX Director,etc...).

The ease of programming and friendly query driven WYSIWYG fo the Netgear M4250 and M4300 stuff should give your AV Donkey peace of mind that these are things they can handle, and should prefer to handle themselves. Giving them the budget to do so (assuming you have to buy the ports no matter who they come from), and providing sensible infrastructure convergence (providing the rackspace, patching and backbone where most practical) should help.
Ah, bummer, he's never going to buy into spending any of his giant budget on networking that we've been giving him for free. And we can't afford to buy separate switches just for AV. That's why this stuff was supposed to move to a dedicated VLAN (and VRF, and firewall security zone). Also he has needs for connectivity into it via our VPN.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply, though.

Re: Gear you HATE

172
biscuitdough wrote: Thu Aug 10, 2023 11:52 am Ah, bummer, he's never going to buy into spending any of his giant budget on networking that we've been giving him for free. And we can't afford to buy separate switches just for AV. That's why this stuff was supposed to move to a dedicated VLAN (and VRF, and firewall security zone). Also he has needs for connectivity into it via our VPN.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply, though.
No problem.

One of the issues I see is that he was getting free enterprise ports from you guys to begin with, and hadn't a care in the world that the reliability might not be stellar what with all the user and WiFi traffic, VoIP and potential BAS/BMS traffic.

This ends up being an executive imperative. Someone with authority needs to make the decision that: a) he WILL migrate to the assigned VLAN(s) you've set up for him, and he b) WILL in the future need to buy his own switches out of the AV CapEx budget, and will not be getting free network ports any longer.

I know, a big part of this is when AV is under an 'academic technologies' umbrella somewhere in TLA or the provost's office, rather than under IT or physical plant. It can be a mess. I've worked with clients that have AV under the IT umbrella and then TLA and physical plant bitch about that. There's no winning sometimes, other than when the boss, and perhaps their boss, says "this is how it will be done" and they aren't afraid to stand by their decision.

The VPN remote management/monitoring should be easily accommodated through any of these scenarios, using the dual-NIC Extron hardware or switches with assigned OOB ports that can be touched through the VPN.

Re: Gear you HATE

173
Geiginni wrote: Thu Aug 10, 2023 4:27 pm
biscuitdough wrote: Thu Aug 10, 2023 11:52 am Ah, bummer, he's never going to buy into spending any of his giant budget on networking that we've been giving him for free. And we can't afford to buy separate switches just for AV. That's why this stuff was supposed to move to a dedicated VLAN (and VRF, and firewall security zone). Also he has needs for connectivity into it via our VPN.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply, though.
No problem.

One of the issues I see is that he was getting free enterprise ports from you guys to begin with, and hadn't a care in the world that the reliability might not be stellar what with all the user and WiFi traffic, VoIP and potential BAS/BMS traffic.

This ends up being an executive imperative. Someone with authority needs to make the decision that: a) he WILL migrate to the assigned VLAN(s) you've set up for him, and he b) WILL in the future need to buy his own switches out of the AV CapEx budget, and will not be getting free network ports any longer.

I know, a big part of this is when AV is under an 'academic technologies' umbrella somewhere in TLA or the provost's office, rather than under IT or physical plant. It can be a mess. I've worked with clients that have AV under the IT umbrella and then TLA and physical plant bitch about that. There's no winning sometimes, other than when the boss, and perhaps their boss, says "this is how it will be done" and they aren't afraid to stand by their decision.

The VPN remote management/monitoring should be easily accommodated through any of these scenarios, using the dual-NIC Extron hardware or switches with assigned OOB ports that can be touched through the VPN.
AV is under IT. You're right about the OOB.

I also kind of wouldn't want to put the idea in other departments within IT's heads (or anyone else's) that they can come up with a use case and install their own networking.

I think we're going to sic our pen tester on him again and try to make a case to the higher-ups that he needs to move his shit. Again.

Re: Gear you HATE

174
biscuitdough wrote: Thu Aug 10, 2023 10:11 pm I also kind of wouldn't want to put the idea in other departments within IT's heads (or anyone else's) that they can come up with a use case and install their own networking.
Oh yes, I'm well aware of the (justifiable) fear IT depts have about rogue non-standard switches on their network. Again, setting policy:
-These departments (pretty much just AV, maybe Security) get to deploy their own network switches.
-Only these make/model of non-standard switches are allowed on campus.
-The switches will be configured to our standards and follow the VLAN and IP blocks WE assign.

It also helps to set policy to control/ban rogue WAPs from AV boxes that host their own APs. Wireless presentation appliances are notorious for this. Shut them down. If your Wi-Fi is secure and offers access levels, we generally advise putting them on the lowest tier of wireless.

Wi-Fi based ALS (assistive listening systems) are IIRC unicast devices and need to broadcast to (as a guess, since ADA has not been updated since 2010 and a lot has changed in our world in this time) about 10-20% of the seats (adoption could be greater as kids love to wear their pods and could just listen in everywhere - even without any prescriptive or non-prescriptive hearing loss). That means in a 1000 seat auditorium, you've got to support perhaps 100-200 subscribers to that unicast stream.

Cheers!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests