Redundancy Session PDF

Network Redundancy
& Topologies
© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Network Redundancy – Objective
Learn the design & application details of several

network redundancy protocols so you can make the
best choice for your network, including a 0 packet
loss redundancy method.

Contents
 Standardized vs proprietary
 Two stages of redundancy
 Layer 2 redundancy
 Mixing technologies
 The next generation
 Management

Standardised vs Proprietary Technology
Standardized:
• Works across manufacturers
• Future-proof
• Well understood
Proprietary:
• Fulfills niche requirements
• In the past often with better performance and
• More simple to configure

Take Note…..
There is no standard for measuring network recovery time

• Exact meaning of “recovery”?
• Network load?
• Number of Learned Addresses?
• Location of failure?
• Source to destination, or round trip?
• Type of traffic?
• Interaction with other (redundancy) protocols?
• …

Contents
P
 Management

Two Stages of Redundancy
Whichever redundancy method is used, there

are two stages
• Re-establish the physical connection
• Re-establish the logical/data connection

Re-establishing Communications
PC1
Logical
Physical
Switchescommunication
communication
need to re-learn their
re-established
address tablesand
re-established, data
butlogical/data
for NOT
can resume
logical communication
communication to resume
A
B E Switch D’s Learned

Address Table
Device Path
PC1 Port 1
PC1 Port 2
C D
PC2
Port 1

Contents
P
P
 Management

End device redundant connections
• The redundancy functionality must be provided by the end devices

• This is not a function of the network equipment
Ethernet Ethernet
Network Network

Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol
Objective
• Creation of resilient meshed networks

Graph Theory
Spanning Tree Graph

ROOT
Determination of Root 3
Bridge
• The switch with the lowest
assigned priority of all the
switches will be the root
24 92 12
• The bridge priority default
is 32768 and can only be
configured in multiples of
4096 (0 being lowest
value)
• If priority value is same,
hex value of MAC is used 4 5 7

ROOT
Determination of Root Ports

(least cost paths to root)
• Messages from any connected
device to the root bridge must
RP RP RP
traverse a least cost path
• Cost = sum of the costs of
the segments on the path
• The port connecting to that
path becomes the root port
(RP) of the bridge.
RP RP RP
Assuming cost of traversing any network segment is 1

ROOT
Determination of Designated Port
3
• Least cost path from each network DP DP
segment to Root
Data rate RSTP cost
4 Mbit/s 5,000,000
10 Mbit/s 2,000,000
16 Mbit/s 1,250,000
24 DP 92 12
100 Mbit/s 200,000 DP DP
1 Gbit/s 20,000
2 Gbit/s 10,000
10 Gbit/s 2,000
• Port connected to lowest

cost path is Designated 4
DP
5 7
Port

ROOT
Blocking Ports 3
DP DP
• Any active port that is not
a root port or a designated
port is a blocked port
RP RP RP
• Port connected to lowest
24 DP BP 92 12
cost path is Designated
DP DP
Port
RP RP RP
DP BP
4 5 7

ROOT
Resulting Spanning Tree 3

DP DP
Algorithm
RP RP RP
24 DP BP 92 12
DP DP
RP RP RP
DP BP
4 5 7

ROOT
Link Failure in Spanning 3

DP DP
Tree Network
• After link failure the
spanning tree algorithm
RP RP RP
computes and spans new
least-cost network tree 24 DP BP 92 12
DP DP
DP
RP RP RP
RP
DP DP
BP
4 5 7

Things to know
about the IEEE & IEC standard RSTP
Recovery times IEEE type 2sec.
IEC type 5 - 20ms per hop (switch)
Ring size Up to 40 switches
Advantages Extremely simple to implement for basic use, but needs to be fine-
tuned to gain reliability and faster recovery times
Supports loop prevention
Disadvantages Unpredictable recovery times (Milliseconds to Seconds)
Unsuitable for large rings – maximum 40 hops
Complex configuration to gain faster recovery times
Inventor IEC and IEEE standardized
Interoperability Standardized (IEEE 802.1D-2004 & IEC62439-1) and supported
across many manufacturers
All switches in a RSTP network have to support RSTP
Recommendation If the application must tolerate multiple network failures
If the customer wants a standard-based solution (but see MRP,
HSR, PRP)
Fast but not consistent recovery times are required
Small network diameter
Connection to an existing RSTP network (not exceeding RSTP
specifications)
Ring technologies
Objective
Creation of a reliable, highly available and resilient ring structure with
predictable recovery times

Ring technologies
“Commonalities”
Recovery times Fast recovery times with <500ms
Advantages Predictable Recovery Times

Ring size >100 switches
Easy to implement
Infrastructure Often just one additional cable
Disadvantages Single fault tolerant

Very often proprietary implementations
Inventor Company specific
Interoperability Often not available

The Ring concept is simple.

Daisy-chain managed switches via any mix of
copper/fiber and data speeds – up to 10Gig!

Assign any (one) switch to be the
Redundancy Manager and close the ring
RM

Watch-dog packets
Ethernet packets traverse
only entire
traverse ring,
active link
ensuring
segmentsring integrity.
Watch-dog packets
RM Ethernet data packets
Link down packets

The Redundancy Manager activates the standby
A cable or switch failure will cause Watch-dog
link and instructs switches to flush/renew
packets to not fully traverse the network
address tables
Watch-dog packets
Ethernet data packets
Link down packets

New address
In parallel, tables arepackets
Watch-dog learned continue
and Ethernet
data is automatically
testing integrity re-routed
Watch-dog packets
Ethernet data packets
Link down packets

Demo

A few incompatible ring technologies
X-Ring Ultra-Ring
N-Ring OnTime-Ring
ICON
M-Ring P-Ring Ring
V-Ring HSR*
Siemens
Rapid-Ring
T-Ring Rapid Super
Ring
HIPER-Ring
Z-Ring
Real-Time Ring
FRNT
S-Ring

Comparison of Redundancy Protocols
defined in IEC62439
Available
Protocol Most current Standard Typical re-config Remark since
any topology/mesh, diameter
STP Spanning Tree Protocol IEEE 802.1d 30s limited 1990
RSTP Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol IEEE 802.1D-2004 2s limited 2004
Cross-Network Redundancy 1s worst case for 512 end any topology/ duplicated
CRP Protocol IEC 62439-4:2010 nodes networks 2007
4...8ms worst case for 500 Two top level switches with star,
BRP Beacon Redundancy Protocol IEC 62439-5:2010 end nodes line or ring topologies 2007
Distributed Redundancy 100ms worst case for 50
DRP Protocol IEC 62439-6:2010 switches ring, double ring 2010
200ms worst case for 50
MRP Media Redundancy Protocol IEC 62439-2:2010 switches ring 1998/2007
switches
Fast MRP Media Redundancy Protocol IEC 62439-2:2010 switches ring 2010
IEEE 802.1D-2004 (configuration
Optimized requirements described in IEC
RSTP Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol 62439-1:2010) 5...20ms per switch ring 2010
High-Availability Seamless
HSR Redundancy IEC 62439-3:2012-07 0ms ring 2010
PRP Parallel Redundancy Protocol IEC 62439-3:2012-07 0ms any toplogy/ duplicated networks 2010
(1) pre-standard Hiper Ring since 1998, MRP since 2007

(2) pre-standard Fast Hiper Ring since 2007

IEC62439 Redundancy
Standardized meshed, ring and back-up line topologies
200ms
MRP
optimized 80ms
Fast MRP 10ms
5-20ms per hop

RSTP

Device level ring (DLR)
Standardized ring topologies
DLR Sub ms
Defined in the ODVA

Combinations with other redundancy technologies
possible

Things to know
about the “Industrial Standard” HIPER Ring
Recovery times Standard Mode 200ms
Fast HIPER Mode 40ms

>20.000 switches Fast Hiper-Ring
Extremely simple to implement
Disadvantages Proprietary and single fault tolerant
Inventor Hirschmann launched a Hub-based ring in 1990.

This was the first version of “HIPER-Ring”
Interoperability Only if all devices support HIPER Ring

Not possible to reset Learned Address Tables
Unpredictable recovery time
Multicast watchdog packets will be broadcast
Recommendation Upgrade of existing (HIPER Ring) applications

Things to know
about the IEC standard MRP
Recovery times Standard Mode 80ms

Fast MRP Mode 30ms
Extremely simple to implement
Inventor MRP is an IEC standardized version of HIPER Ring, with
some optimizations
Interoperability As an IEC standard, any manufacturer can implement MRP.
Hirschmann has added some additional features:
 Support for ring coupling
 Maximum 200 switches in a ring (IEC standard = 50)
 80ms recovery time (standard 200ms)
Recommendation Application requires consistent recovery times
Customer wants a clear network topology
Geography is not suitable for a meshed structure
Minimized commissioning and maintenance effort
Customer wants a standard based solution

Setting up MRP using Automatic Ring
Configuration & Diagnostic (ARC)
• Connect all “out of the box” switches to

form a ring topology
• Select any (one) switch to be the
Redundancy Master and assign it an IP
address
• User web browser or HiView to enter
that switch’s management
• Run ARC
• ARC checks switches, verifies ring
topology, automatically enables MRP
and saves configurations

Things to know
about the ODVA standard DLR
Recovery times 50 nodes <3ms

Easy to implement
Inventor Published in ODVA EtherNet/IP specification, November, 2008
Interoperability As an ODVA standard, any ODVA member can implement DLR.
Recommendation Application requires consistent and very fast recovery times

Geography is not suitable for a meshed structure
Customer wants a standard based solution

Multiple Rings
Possibilities
RM
SRM1
Sub-Ring 1
Base-Ring SRM2
SRM1
SRM2
Sub-Ring 2
RM – Redundancy Manager
SRM – Sub-Ring Manager

Multiple Rings
Possibilities
Sub-
Ring
Sub- RM
Ring
SRM
Sub-Ring
Base-Ring
SRM
Sub-
Ring Sub-
Sub- Ring
Ring RM – Redundancy Manager

Multiple Rings
Possibilities RM SRM
SRM
Base-Ring
SRM
SRM

Multiple Rings
Possibilities
RM
SRM
Sub Ring
Base-Ring SRM
SRM
SRM
Sub Ring

Multiple Rings
RM
Possibilities Base-Ring
SRM SRM

Things to know
about Multiple Rings
Recovery times <100ms

Ring size Up to 200 switches (MRP)
Easy to implement
tolerates multiple network failures (depending on location)
up to 16 sub-rings are possible
Disadvantages Proprietary technology
Inventor Multiple vendors have developed proprietary technologies
Interoperability No
Requirements Sub Ring starts and ends at the same Base (backbone) Ring
Base Ring has to be either HIPER Ring or MRP
Recommendation Application requires consistent and very fast recovery times


Ring Extension: Ring/Net Coupling
Redundant Connection of
RM
Multiple Rings or Networks
• This allows the redundant Base-Ring

coupling of redundant rings and
network segments.
• Two rings or network segments

Master
(or multiple combinations of the Slave
Coupling Port Active
Coupling Port on Standby
two) are connected via two
separate paths. Base-Ring
RM

Redundant Ring/Net Coupling
Compensates two faults

in a Ring topology

Things to know
about redundant Ring-/ Net-coupling
Recovery times <250ms

Simple to implement
Can compensate for two faults in a Ring topology
Disadvantages Proprietary technology
Interoperability No
Recommendation Application requires consistent and fast recovery times

Redundant coupling of redundant rings and/or network segments.

Link Aggregation
Objective
• Create a single high-bandwidth logical link from multiple lower-
bandwidth physical links (trunking)
• Not developed for redundancy, but to increase bandwidth
1x 1Gigabit = 4Gig
2x
3x
4x 1Gig
2Gig
3Gig
Link Aggregation
Control Protocol (LACP)

Link Aggregation over wireless
Wireless LAN
2.4 GHz WLAN
Wireless LAN
5 GHz WLAN

Link Aggregation
Advantages
• Standardized 802.1ax and 802.1aq
• Easily configured
• Fast recovery times
• Increased throughput
• Commonly used in IT to increase bandwidth to
servers
Disadvantages
• Unpredictable recovery times

Link Backup – Link Redundancy
Link Interface pair consist of any combination of physical interfaces,
e.g. one 100Mbit SFP and the other 1000Mbit
One is the standby link, the other the primary (active).
Only the active port is forwarding traffic.
If the primary link shuts down, the standby link starts forwarding traffic.
B C
Example:
ports 1 and 2 on switch A are connected to
uplink switches B and C.
If port 1 is the active link, communication is
enabled.
Port two is in stand by mode.
If link 1 goes down, port 2 will be enabled and
starts forwarding traffic to switch C. Port 1 Port 2
If link 1 comes back again, communication will
still go through port 2.
Port 1 is now the new stand by port.
A

Link Backup
Advantages
• Easily configured
• Fast recovery times
B C
Disadvantages
• Proprietary
Port 1 Port 2

Contents
PStandardized vs proprietary

PTwo stages of redundancy


PLayer 2 redundancy

 Management

Mixing technologies
When possible, do not mix standardized and proprietary Layer 2

redundancy technologies
• Integrity/network health packets (watch-dog and similar) may not be
allowed to pass
• Switches may not know that they need
to flush and re-learn their address tables
Proprietary
Standard
Standard and
Proprietary

MRP (Media Redundancy Protocol) over
Link Aggregation
Combination of Link Aggregation and MRP
To increase the availability or bandwidth for some connections or the entire ring
Link
Aggregation
MRM
Example:
MRP over LAG for one connection only
MRM
Example:
MRP over LAG for the entire ring

Combining MRP and RSTP
Using RSTP on MRP

In the MRP compatibility mode, the
device allows to combine RSTP
with MRP. MRP
With the combination of RSTP and

MRP, the fast switching times of
MRP are maintained.
RSTP
RSTP applies to the devices outside
the MRP-Ring.

Redundancy combinations with DLR
and Link aggregation
DLR

and Link backup
DLR

and MRP
DLR
MRP

and MRP/Link aggregation
DLR
MRP

and RSTP
DLR
RSTP

and RSTP
DLR
RSTP

and Sub-Ring
DLR
Sub-Ring

Contents
P
P
PLayer 2 redundancy

P
 Management

Layer 3 Redundancy
Redundancy for routers

• VRRP
• HiVRRP
Redundancy for links

• RIP
• OSPF

Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol
VRRP (RFC 3768)
10.0.0.0/24
10.0.0.1
Virtual IP
Master address and Backup
Hello packets MAC address
each second 
Recovery time 192.168.0.1

3 sec.
192.168.0.0/24

HiVRRP
• Proprietary
• Same principle as VRRP
• Faster
• VRRP hello packet each second
after 3 second alternative backup
• HiVRRP hello packet each 100ms
after 300ms alternative backup
• 10 times faster than the standard

Routing Protocols (link redundancy)
Task: dynamic selection of paths through a network
• Static routing
• Manually enter the routes
• Routing protocols
• RIP Routing Information Protocol
• OSPF Open Shortest Path First
• (BGP Border Gateway Protocol) WAN
• (IGRP Interior Gateway Routing Protocol) WAN
• ….

RIP (Distance Vector)
Router Information Protocol (RFC 1058, v2: RFC 1723)

• For networks with a small number of routers
• Only metric is hop count
• Maximum 15 hops

RIP Routing Tables
Stuttgart
A 1 hop N/A
B 1 hop N/A
C 2 hops Frankfurt
D 2 hops Frankfurt
E 2 hops Munich
F 2 hops Frankfurt
G 3 hops Frankfurt
H 3 hops Frankfurt
Exchanging route information

OSPF (Link State)
Open Shortest Path First (RFC 1247)

• For networks with a large number of routers
• Link state algorithm with criteria (metrics) for routing decisions:
• Path cost
• Type Of Service field (prioritisation)

Shortest Path First Algorithm
Munich
0
Stuttgart Frankfurt Leipzig

188 305 367
Hannover Berlin
585 512

Comparison - Dynamic Routing Protocols
Distance Vector Routing (RIP)

• Small networks
• Simple
• Slow in noticing changes (convergence), approx. 180sec
Link State Routing (OSPF)

• Large networks
• Complex
• Fast in noticing changes, approx. 30 sec.

Contents
PStandardized vs proprietary

PTwo stages of redundancy


PLayer 2 redundancy

PMixing technologies

PLayer 3 redundancy

 Management

A few incompatible ring technologies
X-Ring Ultra-Ring
N-Ring OnTime-Ring
ICON
M-Ring P-Ring Ring
V-Ring HSR*
Siemens
Rapid-Ring
T-Ring Rapid Super
Ring
HIPER-Ring
Z-Ring
Real-Time Ring
FRNT
S-Ring

Comparison of Redundancy Protocols
defined in IEC62439
Available
Protocol Most current Standard Typical re-config Remark since
STP Spanning Tree Protocol IEEE 802.1d 30s limited 1990
RSTP Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol IEEE 802.1D-2004 2s limited 2004
Cross-Network Redundancy 1s worst case for 512 end any topology/ duplicated
CRP Protocol IEC 62439-4:2010 nodes networks 2007
4...8ms worst case for 500 Two top level switches with star,
BRP Beacon Redundancy Protocol IEC 62439-5:2010 end nodes line or ring topologies 2007
Distributed Redundancy 100ms worst case for 50
DRP Protocol IEC 62439-6:2010 switches ring, double ring 2010
MRP Media Redundancy Protocol IEC 62439-2:2010 switches ring 1998/2007
switches
Fast MRP Media Redundancy Protocol IEC 62439-2:2010 switches ring 2010
IEEE 802.1D-2004 (configuration
Optimized requirements described in IEC
RSTP Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol 62439-1:2010) 5...20ms per switch ring 2010
High-Availability Seamless
HSR Redundancy IEC 62439-3:2012-07 0ms ring 2010
PRP Parallel Redundancy Protocol IEC 62439-3:2012-07 0ms any toplogy/ duplicated networks 2010
(1) pre-standard Hiper Ring since 1998, MRP since 2007

(2) pre-standard Fast Hiper Ring since 2007

IEC62439 Redundancy
When fast is not fast enough
200ms
MRP
optimized 80ms
Fast MRP 10ms
5-20ms per hop

RSTP

IEC62439 Redundancy
PRP – (Parallel Redundancy Protocol)
Zero failover – duplicated networks No packet loss
PRP Sender PRP Receiver

Red Box 1 Red Box 2
Lan A
Lan B
Port A
Port B
Two redundant networks

By doubling the packets no data loss if one packet fails
PRP-Redundancy-Box = bidirectional splitter and combiner

IEC62439 Redundancy
SAN SAN
SAN SAN
SAN SAN

IEC62439 Redundancy
SAN SAN
SAN SAN
SAN SAN

IEC62439 Redundancy

example standard LAN with RSTP
SAN SAN
SAN SAN
SAN SAN

IEC62439 Redundancy

example standard LAN with MRP
SAN SAN
SAN SAN
SAN SAN

IEC62439 Redundancy

example standard LAN with MRP
MRP
MRP

IEC62439 Redundancy

example standard LAN with wireless
BAT-R BAT-R
Wireless LAN
SAN SAN
SAN SAN
SAN
MRP SAN

IEC62439 Redundancy

example standard LAN with wireless
Wireless LAN
2.4 GHz WLAN
BAT-R BAT-R
SAN SAN
SAN SAN
Wireless LAN
SAN SAN
5 GHz WLAN

IEC62439 Redundancy
No packet loss
Advantages of PRP over WLAN

a) Compensation of lost packets instead of compensation in case of NW failure
(per-packet basis)
b) Reduced latency and jitter, because PRP always forwards the faster packet

Effects of PRP over WLAN – Packet loss
WLAN A
WLAN B
PRP
• Packet loss without PRP Correlated

 Directly visible to application losses
• Packet loss with PRP
• Use of duplicate packets
• Application only experiences loss if both packets are lost at the same time
• Loss rate for uncorrelated losses Verluste: V1xV2 = VPRP
 E.g., 1% x 1% = 0,01% (100 times better)
• Challenge: Losses on both channels must be unrelated
• Use of different channels/frequency bands  diversity
• Elimination of common sources of losses

Effects of PRP over WLAN – Latency and Jitter
WLAN A
WLAN B
PRP
• Root cause of high jitter and latency in WLANs

• Busy channel (CSMA)
• Layer 2 retransmissions because of interference / bad SNR
• Positive effects of PRP in WLANs
• Jitter and latency only increase if the packets on both paths are delayed
• PRP always delivers the faster packet
 Always: as low or better latency and jitter than the better path

HSR (High Available Seamless Ring)
PRP PRP
Packet Packet

IEC62439 Seamless Redundancy
PRP & HSR – Complicated to configure?
No packet loss
2 switches
• 1x “click” each
• Connect the ports

Combination of HSR and PRP
Compensates multiple failures
No packet loss
LAN A
LAN B

Contents
P
P
PLayer 2 redundancy

P
PLayer 3 redundancy

PThe next generation

 Management

Management
• Industrial HiVision
• Other SNMP management platforms
• SCADA via OPC tags and ActiveX control
• Relay contact

Managing Redundancy
• Did you lose a link?

With fast reconvergence, how do you know?
• Industrial HiVision or other SNMP management platforms
• SCADA via OPC tags and ActiveX control
• Using Industrial Profiles, Direct integration into
RSLogix 5000 or SIMATIC STEP 7
• Relay contact to IO or other device

Summary
Implement redundancy only if required
Use if possible standardized technologies
First choice  RSTP  no configuration

• Smaller, non-critical networks
• Fast but not consistent recovery times
MRP or DLR
• Larger and/or mission-critical networks
• Predictable and fast recovery times
PRP/HSR
• Small and/or larger networks
• Best available solution for mission critical and uninterrupted
communication

Demo


Redundancy Session PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Redundancy Session PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Network Redundancy

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Learn the design & application details of several

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

There is no standard for measuring network recovery time

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Whichever redundancy method is used, there

• Re-establish the physical connection

• Re-establish the logical/data connection

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

B E Switch D’s Learned

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

• The redundancy functionality must be provided by the end devices

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Spanning Tree Graph

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Determination of Root Ports

Assuming cost of traversing any network segment is 1

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

• Port connected to lowest

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Resulting Spanning Tree 3

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Link Failure in Spanning 3

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Advantages Predictable Recovery Times

Infrastructure Often just one additional cable

Disadvantages Single fault tolerant

Inventor Company specific

Interoperability Often not available

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

(1) pre-standard Hiper Ring since 1998, MRP since 2007

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Fast MRP 10ms

5-20ms per hop

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Defined in the ODVA

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Advantages Predictable Recovery Times

Disadvantages Proprietary and single fault tolerant

Inventor Hirschmann launched a Hub-based ring in 1990.

Interoperability Only if all devices support HIPER Ring

Recommendation Upgrade of existing (HIPER Ring) applications

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

Recovery times Standard Mode 80ms

© 2017 Belden Inc. | belden.com | @BeldenInc

• Connect all “out of the box” switches to