From owner-freebsd-hackers Sat Jul 17 3: 3:12 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from verdi.nethelp.no (verdi.nethelp.no [158.36.41.162]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A8D3614D68 for ; Sat, 17 Jul 1999 03:03:03 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sthaug@nethelp.no) Received: (qmail 51883 invoked by uid 1001); 17 Jul 1999 10:00:46 +0000 (GMT) To: vince@venus.GAIANET.NET Cc: tim@storm.digital-rain.com, freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: poor ethernet performance? From: sthaug@nethelp.no In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 17 Jul 1999 02:12:38 -0700 (PDT)" References: X-Mailer: Mew version 1.05+ on Emacs 19.34.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 12:00:46 +0200 Message-ID: <51881.932205646@verdi.nethelp.no> Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I am benefiting from it for sure. I guess what I was asking > originally was if the higher frequency rated cables will give it more > headroom since the 100BaseTX ethernet does push CAT5 to the limit. 100BaseTX is specified to run on Cat5 cabling, and with proper Cat5 cabling you get a a BER of 10^-8 or better. As long as your cabling meets the Cat5 spec, you'll get 100 Mbps - there's no possibility of "more headroom" with cables rated to higher frequency. Note that 100BaseTX is different from 10BaseT (but similar to synchronous serial lines) in that there is always a signal present. Note also that FreeBSD can easily saturate 100 Mbps Ethernet. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message