Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 12:49:02 +0300 From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@serebryakov.spb.ru> To: Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [patch] re(4) problems on networks with disabled autonegotiation "solver" (WAS: Juniper e3k with ports limitied to...) -- REQUEST FOR REVIEW Message-ID: <109705248.20110113124902@serebryakov.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <20110112213208.GD12920@michelle.cdnetworks.com> References: <36074996.20110112192009@serebryakov.spb.ru> <20110112213208.GD12920@michelle.cdnetworks.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Pyun. You wrote 13 =FF=ED=E2=E0=F0=FF 2011 =E3., 0:32:08: > seemed to address the issue at that time. 1000baseT link always > requires auto-negotiation but too many switches were broken with > auto-negotiation so some switches are forced to use manual media > configuration even in 1000baseT mode. Using auto-negotiation on > rgephy(4) will also solve that case. Please note, my patch doesn't affect 1Gig case at all, I understand, that 1Gig REQUIRES autonegotiation. > I'm under the impression that rgephy(4)'s behavior seem to confuse > users a lot since it unconditionally use auto-negotiation so I > think it's better not to use auto-negotiation at all during manual > media configuration and provides a way to use auto-negotiation in > manual media configuration if administrator want to do that. So, invert meaning (and name) of tunable? --=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?109705248.20110113124902>