From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Dec 26 12:44:25 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8CE916A41F; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 12:44:25 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from killing@multiplay.co.uk) Received: from multiplay.co.uk (core6.multiplay.co.uk [85.236.96.23]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 335E843D55; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 12:44:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from killing@multiplay.co.uk) Received: from vader ([82.37.32.39]) by multiplay.co.uk (multiplay.co.uk [85.236.96.23]) (MDaemon.PRO.v8.1.3.R) with ESMTP id md50002148110.msg; Mon, 26 Dec 2005 12:44:10 +0000 Message-ID: <003101c60a1a$0c181490$0100a8c0@multiplay.co.uk> From: "Steven Hartland" To: "Scott Long" , "Jack Vogel" References: <2a41acea0512220941y61c9b5acs8053e6df8a96a1e4@mail.gmail.com> <2a41acea0512251114u6cdbb439j3cb6e3ec07f97189@mail.gmail.com> <43AF660B.1030506@samsco.org> Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 12:43:55 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2670 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.2670 X-Spam-Processed: multiplay.co.uk, Mon, 26 Dec 2005 12:44:10 +0000 (not processed: message from valid local sender) X-MDRemoteIP: 82.37.32.39 X-Return-Path: killing@multiplay.co.uk X-MDAV-Processed: multiplay.co.uk, Mon, 26 Dec 2005 12:44:11 +0000 Cc: Gleb Smirnoff , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: em bad performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Dec 2005 12:44:25 -0000 We have had several issues with different hardware combinations where 1/2 duplex is an issue. Seems not all vendors implement the standard the same way causing significant problems if the ports on both ends aren't hard coded. Steve ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Long" To: "Jack Vogel" Cc: "Gleb Smirnoff" ; Sent: Monday, December 26, 2005 3:39 AM Subject: Re: em bad performance > Jack Vogel wrote: >> On 12/22/05, Danny Braniss wrote: >> >> >>>iperf -c host >>> >>>i'm begining to believe that the problem is elsewhere, i just put in >>>an ethernet nic in a PCI-X/Express slot, and the performance is similar, bad. >>> >>>danny >> >> >> Hmm, not some silly like getting set to half duplex? :) >> >> Jack > > Isn't 'half duplex' meaningless in the gigabit link protocol? > > Scott ================================================ This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone (023) 8024 3137 or return the E.mail to postmaster@multiplay.co.uk.