Option to disable SonosNet



Show first post
This topic has been closed for further comments. You can use the search bar to find a similar topic, or create a new one by clicking Create Topic at the top of the page.

72 replies

Userlevel 3
Badge
+1 for me to!
Userlevel 7
Badge +21
As apparently past posts containing the information have been removed, I'll simply mention that Google is your friend. There IS a way to turn off Sonos WiFi if you really want to.

[COLOR="Red"]Disclaimer:[/color] This ability is unsupported and undocumented. As such, it may be changed or removed from the Sonos firmware in future updates. Also, there could be unknown side-effects that may be introduced as a result of implementing this command. Additionally, if you experience problems with your Sonos system after implementing this, Sonos may choose to deny support to you until your Sonos device(s) is/are returned to a standard configuration.
Userlevel 2
Thanks mikev, your info is very helpful and highly appreciated.
Notice to lurkers.

Be aware that any unsupported options which you may stumble across elsewhere are just that: Unsupported. As such they would be undocumented, have unknown side-effects, and could be subject to change and withdrawal without notice.

Furthermore Sonos Support would be within their rights if they felt less than inclined to assist if you subsequently ran into difficulties.

This is not scaremongering; it's a simple statement of reality.
Userlevel 7
Badge +21
There we go... added a disclaimer to my post. I suppose it would've been good to put that in from the start.

I'm not new to implementing unsupported and undocumented changes to devices I own, and usually won't do so unless there's an easy way to undo the change to return to a supported state (which fortunately there is with this one).

Additionally, I fully understand Sonos' right to refuse support for a device that has had such unsupported/undocumented commands implemented on it. Hence the reason that I won't usually implement such a change unless it's easily undone. Sonos has every right to require that their devices are in a standard state before they spend time and effort to troubleshoot a problem.

And lastly, before I stop posting in this topic... I found this information on my own and was not provided it or asked to post about it here by anyone that may be lurking.
Userlevel 2
Once again, Sonos is not "chewing up another 2.4 GHz frequency when it's not being used" because it is actually not being used! Sonos always chooses a wired path over a wireless path, so there will be nothing happening on the wireless network, aside from the almost negligible traffic to maintain the network, which will be less than the interference from naturally occurring noise.

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree.

I have a PLAY:5 hard wired to my network, and just purchased several PLAY:3 to expand the sound in our office. I powered up the 3, connected it to my network, and shortly thereafter my entire internal network went down.

Unplugging the PLAY:3 from the network brings it back up, plugging it back in takes it back down. Someone mentioned that the system will only use wired when it is connected, and that spanning tree should be advertising its connectivity, but clearly something isn't working as you stated, since the sonos system is creating a loop on our network and breaking EVERYTHING.

Why is there no option to disable wifi? I can easily get ethernet to anywhere in my office. We are already using an enterprise grade wireless network with multiple APs throughout our office, using all available 2.4 channels. It makes no sense that I can't disable the wifi on sonos when I am not using it at all.

tl;dr: +1 for disabling wifi
Unplugging the PLAY:3 from the network brings it back up, plugging it back in takes it back down. Someone mentioned that the system will only use wired when it is connected, and that spanning tree should be advertising its connectivity, but clearly something isn't working as you stated, since the sonos system is creating a loop on our network and breaking EVERYTHING.
jgatie didn't say there was no wireless connectivity when Players are wired. He said there was negligible wireless traffic.

Your problem is that switches on the path between Sonos units are stopping STP traffic. If BPDUs are blocked the multiply bridged network won't sort itself out. You'll get undetected loops, resulting in broadcast storms.

If you're unable to resolve the switch issue then either run the new Play:3s wirelessly or, if the cabling permits, daisy-chain them.

This post may be useful: http://forums.sonos.com/showthread.php?t=16973
Userlevel 2
jgatie didn't say there was no wireless connectivity when Players are wired. He said there was negligible wireless traffic.

Your problem is that switches on the path between Sonos units are stopping STP traffic. If BPDUs are blocked the multiply bridged network won't sort itself out. You'll get undetected loops, resulting in broadcast storms.

If you're unable to resolve the switch issue then either run the new Play:3s wirelessly or, if the cabling permits, daisy-chain them.



Yet another reason there should be an option to disable wireless. Not all switches support STP and forcing people to go out and buy a new switch doesn't make sense when it would be easy to add another option to the wireless settings to disable it all together.

daisy chaining is not an option since there is only 1 ethernet port on the PLAY:3.

I was able to get my setup working using the info in the post you linked to. for those who care, its a netgear GS110TP, and my settings are as follows. I thought enabling STP would be enough, but I was wrong...

I've actually taken some notes on the GS108T (although my notes are for the -200)

While it shouldn't necessarily require the RSTP step, it does seem to require the IGMP Snooping set to enabled.
STP
Basic
STP Configuration
Spanning Tree State: Disable
STP Operation Mode: RSTP
BPDU: Enable
Multicast
IGMP Snooping
IGMP Snooping Configuration
IGMP Snooping Status: Enabled

Let me know
I have crowded wifi spectrum which is causing dropout.

Unfortunately no option to cable the bridge/player. However I will try ethernet over power. Thanks for the idea.

I support the request to disable WiFi.

+ 1 for disable WiFi.

Also,

I would like to request Sonos start to release 5GHz radios on the WiFi.

The 2.4 spectrum is crowded for anyone in apartments.

My workaround was manually reduce the power output in my router (an advanced option), manually change channel and narrow the frequency range of broadcasts. (20/40 MHz option to 20Mhz only)

It has worked so far, but using 5GHz would fix it in one go.

An idea for future products.

Please comment and vote for new product on dual band / frequency WiFi.
nortstarpete,

PLAYBAR, PLAY:3 and SUB use 5GHz when in surround mode.

I don't think that 5GHz should be an exclusive option because it is inferior to 2.4GHz with respect to range and penetration.
+1 on this as well. All my stuff is wired anyway (except for my phone and tablet)... There's no need for SonosNet to be chewing up another 2.4 GHz frequency when it's not being used, especially since I live in a Condo community with a high concentration of WiFi networks in a small area.

Once again, Sonos is not "chewing up another 2.4 GHz frequency when it's not being used" because it is actually not being used! Sonos always chooses a wired path over a wireless path, so there will be nothing happening on the wireless network, aside from the almost negligible traffic to maintain the network, which will be less than the interference from naturally occurring noise.


I have an RF/EMF meter and I can tell you 100% that Sonos speakers do still attempt to communicate via Wifi even when hardwired. I have measured it. My guess is it is the Sonos Net function trying to ping other speakers. It is a powerful packet and is constant.
It is a powerful packet and is constant.
Actually it's more like one STP packet every second, all part of the mesh maintenance and ensuring that wired paths are preferred. A tiny bandwidth requirement, and 'powerful' is hardly the word.
I'd like to see the ability to disable SonosNet and use only wired ethernet, where appropriate. We've had some issues putting a zoneplayer in the equipment room, where there is very strong Zigbee and Wi-Fi Signal strength. We've had to place the zoneplayers in remote rooms and feed the line level audio back to the head end via baluns over Cat5. If those Zoneplayers could have the SonosNet disabled, we could just use ethernet, if a remotely-located bridge could convert sonosnet and transmit over the ethernet network , so long as that bridge was hardwired on the network.

Wow I read every post and do not see any solution to your problem. Did you find out any good info? Is there a way to disable Sonos Net? The google information did not work for my setup.


I have an RF/EMF meter and I can tell you 100% that Sonos speakers do still attempt to communicate via Wifi even when hardwired. I have measured it. My guess is it is the Sonos Net function trying to ping other speakers. It is a powerful packet and is constant.


No offense, but your definition of "powerful" has no basis in reality, and passes way over into the realm of serious paranoia.


I have an RF/EMF meter and I can tell you 100% that Sonos speakers do still attempt to communicate via Wifi even when hardwired. I have measured it. My guess is it is the Sonos Net function trying to ping other speakers. It is a powerful packet and is constant.


No offense, but your definition of "powerful" has no basis in reality, and passes way over into the realm of serious paranoia.


Instead of offering help on a help thread you take a jab. I'm not interested in your opinion. I'm interested in a solution. +6V/m at 8 feet is a powerful transmission regardless of if you think the data transferred over the pulse is insignificant.
It is a powerful packet and is constant.
Actually it's more like one STP packet every second, all part of the mesh maintenance and ensuring that wired paths are preferred. A tiny bandwidth requirement, and 'powerful' is hardly the word.


While you may be referring to total bandwidth I am not concerned with bandwidth. I can't speak for your setup, but I can for mine with data I measured. I am talking about the RF pulse strength- at +6V/m at 8 feet it is a powerful transmission regardless of if you think the data transferred over the pulse is insignificant. On my speakers it often happens more than 1 time per second.

Instead of offering help on a help thread you take a jab. I'm not interested in your opinion. I'm interested in a solution. +6V/m at 8 feet is a powerful transmission regardless of if you think the data transferred over the pulse is insignificant.


Jab or not, I stand by my assessment. If you don't want criticism of your whacky opinions, don't post them online. Even more so, don't post them as a criticism of someone else's post and then not expect a rebuttal.
Whatever the strength of a pulse, the fact remains that the total energy is related to bandwidth. Case in point: adjacent channel interference.

Sorry, this conversation is veering into tinfoil-hat territory. I'm done.