From owner-freebsd-questions Sun Jul 22 1:57:55 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from lists.blarg.net (lists.blarg.net [206.124.128.17]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3F0437B406 for ; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:57:37 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from coffee@blarg.net) Received: from thig.blarg.net (thig.blarg.net [206.124.128.18]) by lists.blarg.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B246BC80; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:57:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from paco.blarg.net (trilluser@paco.fatburrito.com [206.124.139.210]) by thig.blarg.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA05508; Sun, 22 Jul 2001 01:57:36 -0700 Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20010722015933.00b1ce98@mail.blarg.net> X-Sender: coffee@mail.blarg.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Sun, 22 Jul 2001 02:00:16 -0700 To: "default013 - subscriptions" , From: "Derek C." Subject: Re: Strange Networking Problem In-Reply-To: References: <5.1.0.14.0.20010721205404.00b04410@mail.blarg.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG :-) we have the exact opposite problem at work... our nic's tweak when we autosense, so we have to set them to full duplex... Glad I could be of assistance. Derek At 01:56 AM 7/22/2001, default013 - subscriptions wrote: >Derek, > >I want to thank you for your advise. I have had this problem for months now >and have been completely stumped on it... my best guess on it was the >gateway issue (which I failed to find a resolution to)... > >Your advise on going full duplex prompted me to investigate... As I did not >really understand what this meant or how it was configured, I searched >around on the web and found this faq: >http://homepage.ntlworld.com/robin.d.h.walker/cmtips.html#ethernet > >In this FAQ, they mention that the cablemodem called the surfboard3100 is >only capable of doing half-duplex, and that it has some sort of bug in it >that sometimes when computers auto-sense the duplex setting, it messes up >and you get packet collisions due to discombobulations between duplex >settings on your network... (in technical terms :P) > >Anyways, I'm surprised it was that easy, on my network, the (by the way, my >cable modem is a surfboard2100 so, I was sure it applied to me as well) main >machines are 2 windows machines, and 1 freebsd server. The only computer >that is capable of doing 100Mbps is my main workstation, which after I set >it to 10Mbps half-duplex, stopped all of the packet loss on the rest of my >local network! I don't completely understand it, but it fixed my issue and >I'm way happy. > >Thanks alot, > >Jordan > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Derek C." >To: "default013 - subscriptions" >Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2001 10:55 PM >Subject: Re: Strange Networking Problem > > > > I would force both your WinBox and your BSD box in to full duplex mode. I > > don't know why, I don't see the logic in it, but this is how we fix packet > > loss when it happens to us at work, and it has worked every time. > > > > Derek > > > > At 08:39 PM 7/21/2001, you wrote: > > >Hello, > > > > > >I am on an AT&T cable line at the moment and I have a few computers on >the > > >network all connected through a hub. My FreeBSD machine has 2 of the >I.P.s > > >on it... The problem is that frequently I get 50% packet loss (according >to > > >ping) between my FreeBSD server and my Windows workstation. I verify the > > >situation by an extremely slow connection using any protocol... I believe >it > > >is because both machines are going through different gateways. > > > > > >My future fix to this problem is upgrading my ISP and getting a service >that > > >will put all of my machines on the same gateway, and eventually setting >up > > >some sort of router or NAT system to route packets... but currently, I'm > > >stuck in this bad situation... I am sure that it has to do with the >gateway > > >because if I telnet to another off-network system, I can get back to the > > >server just fine. > > > > > >I am wondering, if anyone understands how this problem works, and if so, >are > > >there any FreeBSD networking tricks that I can use to minimize or >eliminate > > >it? > > > > > >P.S. > > >I am confused as to why one can't bind a 192.168 addy to the regular nic >and > > >access it that way... I tried it and was > > >only able to access it from the server itself... I have been told that if >I > > >had two NICs and setup NAT to filter between the WAN and the LAN, I could >do > > >it... but why can't one just setup a 192.168 on the regular NIC? > > > > > > > > >Thanks, > > > > > >Jordan > > > > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > >with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message