Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 12:56:03 -0600 (MDT) From: "Kenneth D. Merry" <ken@plutotech.com> To: sthaug@nethelp.no Cc: mtaylor@cybernet.com, doconnor@gsoft.com.au, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, shocking@prth.pgs.com Subject: Re: Decent network cards for 100Mbit? Message-ID: <199905031856.MAA25061@panzer.plutotech.com> In-Reply-To: <49073.925751066@verdi.nethelp.no> from "sthaug@nethelp.no" at "May 3, 1999 7: 4:26 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
sthaug@nethelp.no wrote... > > The Tulip-based cards are flatulent sacks of pus as well. > > There are multicast problem with them. I'm sure Bill Paul can give us a > > few words about these cards... > > Well, it also depends on the driver. In a previous job situation, using > Linux, we had to ditch several Intel Pro 100B cards and switch to Tulip > based cards - because the Linux driver for the Pro 100B couldn't handle > the multicast stuff while the Tulip cards worked fine. > > Myself, I've used both Tulip and Intel cards for FreeBSD. I have a slight > preference for the Intel cards these days, but have always had good luck > with the Tulip based cards. And of course, if you need something like a > 4-port 10/100 card, Tulip is your only choice at the moment. I'd recommend the Intel Pro 100 cards. I've got 30-40 machines with those cards (Pro/100B and Pro/100+), and haven't had any trouble. As Steinar points out, the key is the driver. In this case, the Intel driver works well. (That's not to say that other drivers don't work, just that my experience with the fxp driver has been good.) Ken -- Kenneth Merry ken@plutotech.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199905031856.MAA25061>