Apple Event: May 7th at 7 am PT

> Learn more

> Add to your calendar 

Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

User profile for user: PCSchilling
PCSchilling Author
User level: Level 1
0 points

What protocols does the new Apple Airport Extreme (802.11ac) block that the prior model did not?

I am a professional AV installer and network engineer. Last week we changed out an old wireless router for a client and replaced it with a new Airport Extreme (802.11ac). On the wired network were three Sonos Connect:Amps with one connected directly to the router, the next connected to the first, and the third connected to the second (each of the Sonos Connect:Amps acts as a switch). In another room was a Sonos Bridge, also connected directly to the router.


The new wireless network speed and range throughout the house was much improved with the shift to the 802.11ac wireless features of the new Airport Extreme until the Sonos Bridge was plugged into it, at which point the entire wireless network slowed to a crawl (from 34Mbs wireless according to Ookla down to 1.5Mbs). The Sonos controllers could not access the Sonos Bridge on any platform (iMacs, iPhones, iPads). I called Sonos and ultimately the problem was escalated to Tier 2 support (engineering). A valid and useful Internet protocol that Sonos products rely upon to intercommunicate was being blocked by the new Airport Extreme (and apparently the Time Capsule as well) and there is currently no provision within the Airport Utility to turn it on so that it behaves as its predecessor did. I believe the intention of blocking this protocol was to help eliminate potentially malicious attacks, which is fine, but then it only needed to be blocked from the WAN, not within the LAN. Until this problem is corrected, we cannot architect solutions involving wired connections of multiple Sonos units with the new Airport Extremes or Time Capsules as routers.


What protocols does the new Apple Airport Extreme (802.11ac) block that the prior model did not?

Posted on Aug 12, 2013 6:21 PM

Reply
11 replies
User profile for user: John Galt
John Galt
User level: Level 10
141,192 points

Aug 12, 2013 11:11 PM in response to PCSchilling

A valid and useful Internet protocol that Sonos products rely upon to intercommunicate was being blocked by the new Airport Extreme


I doubt much information can be provided without knowing exactly what that protocol is. Is it proprietary to Sonos? How was it "turned on" in previous versions of AirPort Utility?


To my knowledge the new Extreme remains compatible with all wireless protocols in all of its preceding models, and lacking any specific information from Sonos I think the above is a dubious conclusion to draw.


Find out exactly what protocol they're using. You may find more help on a Sonos forum: http://forums.sonos.com/index.php

Reply
User profile for user: Bob Timmons
Bob Timmons
Community+ 2024
User level: Level 10
159,608 points

Aug 13, 2013 7:20 AM in response to PCSchilling

What setting or feature on a router does Sonos require?


If it is UPnP, then don't use Apple as they do not support UPnP. However, you can always manually configure the port settings using NAT/PMP if you know the required port values. A prior model would have been compatible doing this, as would the "new" model.


We are wasting time here though....and just guessing at things....until you can tell us what requirements a router must meet to be compatible with the Sonos products.

Reply
User profile for user: LaPastenague
LaPastenague
User level: Level 9
67,226 points

Aug 13, 2013 1:42 PM in response to PCSchilling

You must make sure you use fully SMB naming for the Airport Extreme.. Sonos do not use AFP protocol to connect as indeed nothing but apple products do.


So all names.. short, no spaces and pure alphanumeric.


I am pretty sure you would have followed that and just not mentioned it.


Then use a switch.. and separate AP for the Sonos stuff. It is much easier to get a cheap TP-Link wireless router for instance and use it for local LAN connection.. you can get decent one like 1043 for about $40.


Just set it to fixed channel say 11 for 2.4ghz.. and plug in using wan bypass.. as you don't want another router in the network. I don't think it has a pure WAP mode.


If you do a search around here.. Sonos products cause plenty of issues.. eg

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3773379?answerId=18562619022#18562619022


You would think their support people would work harder to be on top of them since it is a product often selected to work with Apple networks.

Reply
User profile for user: PCSchilling
PCSchilling Author
User level: Level 1
0 points

Aug 13, 2013 7:09 PM in response to John Galt

The new Airport Extremes and Time Capsules are not blocking a wireless protocol, per se. They are blocking STP (Spanning Tree Protocol), which is critical to the correct operation of Sonos units.


The current work around is to interpose an unmanaged switch between the Airport Extreme and all of the Sonos units so that their STP can pass through the switch without issue and not get blocked by the Airport Extreme. While this will work, I would rather push Apple to allow STP through their products, as the former models did.


This being said, I am back to my original question - what other Internet protocols has Apple decided to disallow from passing through their new Airport Extremes and Time Capsules?

Reply
User profile for user: PCSchilling
PCSchilling Author
User level: Level 1
0 points

Aug 13, 2013 7:17 PM in response to LaPastenague

Thanks for the suggestions.


Naming was not our issue, though others have tripped over that one.


I was really meaning to focus just on what is different between the old Airport Extremes and the new ones (plus Time Capsures) since this issue arose only with the introduction of a new Airport Extreme (802.11ac) to an installation that was otherwise stable.

Reply
User profile for user: PCSchilling
PCSchilling Author
User level: Level 1
0 points

Aug 13, 2013 7:29 PM in response to Bob Timmons

Rather than focus on what Sonos needs, I am really concerned more generally on what protocols the new Airport Extremes and Time Capsules are blocking that they did not used to. My decision to purchase and install these products for my clients going forward hinges on understanding how they are going to behave.


If I can't use them when configured as a router because they block a set of protocols that I need for some installations, then I will use them only as wireless access points (WAPs).


Thanks for the response.

Reply
User profile for user: sawan02
sawan02
User level: Level 1
0 points

Sep 16, 2013 7:52 AM in response to PCSchilling

Hi


I didnt realise there is a thread on this ... Topic


I am also facing the same issue, and it is not just sonos.


There is latency in the new Airport Extreme without sonos as well, its erratic, but greater than 1 ms, and the old ones are always less than 1ms when pinged wired.


I have tried on 8 new AC routers at two different sites. Its very frustrating as the old ones are not available, and I have never had problems with them


Any one else facing the latency issues ?


I have connected with the unmanaged switch in between, that still is giving latency .. and is erratic.



Here is my thread :


sawan02


Sep 15, 2013 4:56 AM



Hello


I am having great difficulty with the New Airport Extremes, I have been installing wireless networks using the previous generation Airport Extremes.


The problem is - the old ones have latency less than 1ms. The new ones are erratic, I have tried 8 Diff Routers at diff sites and all have the same issue, to add to the problem, the moment a Network Device Like sonos is connect to the New Extreme the whole network chokes. The Software is all updated and the version on airport is 7.7.1


All the routers are extend via a gigabit switch using CAT 6 Cables, all new network. This is happening at 3 Diff sites, and also all the channels have been set manually using Frequency Scanner by Fluke, and also softares like inSSIDer. All my other projects have the older Extremes with no latency at all.


There is no Co Channel Interferences and I have also taken them to a diff site, Restored them to factory setting and then tried, results are the same!


Please Help



Here are the Ping Examples ..



PING Via Wifi :


PING 10.0.1.4 (10.0.1.4): 56 data bytes

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=4.206 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=4.275 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=4.195 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=4.138 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=4 ttl=255 time=4.695 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=5 ttl=255 time=4.984 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=6 ttl=255 time=7.062 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=7 ttl=255 time=4.560 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=8 ttl=255 time=4.201 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=9 ttl=255 time=23.285 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=10 ttl=255 time=6.059 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=11 ttl=255 time=108.979 ms

Request timeout for icmp_seq 12

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=12 ttl=255 time=1283.157 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=13 ttl=255 time=982.065 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=14 ttl=255 time=205.354 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=15 ttl=255 time=74.677 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=16 ttl=255 time=12.894 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=17 ttl=255 time=1.701 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=18 ttl=255 time=3.416 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=19 ttl=255 time=9.891 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=20 ttl=255 time=19.909 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=306.461 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=22 ttl=64 time=2.334 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=23 ttl=64 time=1.648 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=2.137 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=25 ttl=64 time=4.431 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=26 ttl=64 time=4.522 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=27 ttl=64 time=4.246 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=28 ttl=64 time=3.968 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=29 ttl=64 time=4.631 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=30 ttl=64 time=4.120 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=31 ttl=64 time=18.521 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=32 ttl=64 time=29.760 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=33 ttl=64 time=4.307 ms



PING via Direct LAN


PING 10.0.1.4 (10.0.1.4): 56 data bytes

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=0.410 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=1.929 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=1.829 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=1.244 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.571 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.615 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.379 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=7 ttl=255 time=1.513 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=8 ttl=255 time=1.764 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=9 ttl=255 time=0.861 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=10 ttl=255 time=0.938 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=11 ttl=255 time=1.295 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=12 ttl=255 time=1.294 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=13 ttl=255 time=0.663 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=14 ttl=255 time=1.780 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=15 ttl=255 time=0.577 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=16 ttl=255 time=1.885 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=17 ttl=255 time=1.927 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=18 ttl=255 time=1.573 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=19 ttl=255 time=1.822 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=20 ttl=255 time=1.728 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=21 ttl=255 time=1.624 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=22 ttl=255 time=1.453 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.4: icmp_seq=23 ttl=255 time=1.614 ms


PING to MAIN OLD Router Via LAN


64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=255 time=0.440 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=255 time=0.344 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=255 time=0.392 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=255 time=0.495 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=255 time=0.447 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=255 time=0.338 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=255 time=0.372 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=255 time=0.452 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=255 time=0.330 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=255 time=0.454 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=255 time=0.438 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=11 ttl=255 time=0.434 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=12 ttl=255 time=0.421 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=13 ttl=255 time=0.456 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=14 ttl=255 time=0.329 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=15 ttl=255 time=0.454 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=16 ttl=255 time=0.407 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=17 ttl=255 time=0.450 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=18 ttl=255 time=0.387 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=19 ttl=255 time=0.344 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=20 ttl=255 time=0.354 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=21 ttl=255 time=0.390 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=22 ttl=255 time=0.330 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=23 ttl=255 time=0.346 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=24 ttl=255 time=0.275 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=25 ttl=255 time=0.323 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=26 ttl=255 time=0.316 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=27 ttl=255 time=0.377 ms

64 bytes from 10.0.1.1: icmp_seq=28 ttl=255 time=0.454 ms

Reply

What protocols does the new Apple Airport Extreme (802.11ac) block that the prior model did not?

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple ID.
Learn more Sign up