Is UPnP a rubish protocol ???

[lyapounov]

(15-09-2022 15:35)stefano_mbp Wrote:  … comparing UPNP and DHCP seems quite … senseless …
In my network Minimserver and endpoints are all connected to the same switch that is connected to the router and I’ve never had any issue.
You should give a look to your network topology: it’s not a good practice to have switches in cascade, each switch should be connected to the center of the star (ie the router), in this way you’ll avoid speed issues.
… and it should be better to have switches of the same vendor/model to avoid various protocol issues

1) switch in cascade is a not only a very common practice in the hifi world, which has shown good value, but also in a lot of corporate companies. This is the beauty of all those protocols to be decentralized and to avoid to put the load to the router (can you imagine how many ethernet points are in a corporate ? Many hundreds. Do you know of a router which has many hundred ports ? No, that does not exits. So switches are in cascade) But in my case, I have only two switch cascading; and the last one has only my server and my rendered; this to have the shortest path between the two and no influence from other things. If you google it, you will see that it is a good practice to have one switch at the end with only the server and the renderer

2) you are the very first one to tell that mixing different vendors means speed issues. I myself have always had multiple vendors in my network without any problem. Do you have literature which supports this totally incredible comment ? Again, the beauty of the internet is open norms and protocols ... Can you name a protocol which is different according to the vendor ?

But again, in the Internet world, you add a new device and bing, the DHCP assigns a new IP adress, and the device is there forever.

On the contrary, UPnP is unable to keep the communication. Voilaà