Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 12:18:00 +0300 From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@serebryakov.spb.ru> To: sthaug@nethelp.no Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, ticso@cicely7.cicely.de, artem@aws-net.org.ua, ticso@cicely.de Subject: Re: Juniper e3k with ports limitied to 100Mbit and re NICs on MSI MoBo: problems with duplex negotiation (Hetzner host provider discard FreeBSD support due this bug) Message-ID: <7010235325.20110112121800@serebryakov.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <20110112.101414.41710948.sthaug@nethelp.no> References: <98602823.20110111225049@serebryakov.spb.ru> <20110111220314.GZ39356@cicely7.cicely.de> <165642603.20110112115208@serebryakov.spb.ru> <20110112.101414.41710948.sthaug@nethelp.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Sthaug. You wrote 12 =FF=ED=E2=E0=F0=FF 2011 =E3., 12:14:14: > Manual configuration of FD for 100 Mbps is not in violation of the > standards. What the standards say (for 100 Mbps) is that *if* you have > one end configured for autonegotiation *and* the other end is manually > configured for full duplex, the autoneg end should end up as half duplex > (with the inevitable errors as a result). This may be counterintuitive, > but it's the way the standard is written. Ok, and according to output of Linux's tools, autonegotiation is disabled on port, and full-duplex is set manually. And FreeBSD ignmore manual settings for re(4)/regphy(4) adapters. Here is a problem :( > For Gigabit Ethernet autonegotiation is *required* by the standard, as > other people already have pointed out. Yes, and it works, but cost additional money, which is comparable to price of server itself :( --=20 // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev@serebryakov.spb.ru>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?7010235325.20110112121800>