Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 17:15:24 +0000 From: "Pieper, Jeffrey E" <jeffrey.e.pieper@intel.com> To: "sthaug@nethelp.no" <sthaug@nethelp.no> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, "gondim@bsdinfo.com.br" <gondim@bsdinfo.com.br> Subject: RE: Network Intel X520-SR2 stopping Message-ID: <2A35EA60C3C77D438915767F458D65687E8F8658@ORSMSX111.amr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: <20140702.190739.74686622.sthaug@nethelp.no> References: <CAFOYbcni9NT4eVS53-EB4yP4NO2wbhd9FCTmB=QaqPVjZsNjwQ@mail.gmail.com> <53B3F1B6.9010606@bsdinfo.com.br> <2A35EA60C3C77D438915767F458D65687E8F859E@ORSMSX111.amr.corp.intel.com> <20140702.190739.74686622.sthaug@nethelp.no>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
It depends on the spec of the XFP module, as well as the cabling. The spec = of both types of modules needs to match. I asked the OP to test B2B to elim= inate the XFP as the problem. If you have any suggestions, I'd be happy to= hear them.=20 Jeff -----Original Message----- From: sthaug@nethelp.no [mailto:sthaug@nethelp.no]=20 Sent: Wednesday, July 02, 2014 10:08 AM To: Pieper, Jeffrey E Cc: gondim@bsdinfo.com.br; freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Network Intel X520-SR2 stopping > Is there any way that you can try a reproduce this using a B2B configura= tion, or something that doesn't use XFP as a link partner? I'm thinking tha= t you are correct regarding an incompatibility issue between SFP+ and XFP. Why do you believe that? The optical signals are the same for SFP+ and XFP. We have lots of 10G SFP+ / XFP links in production. It just works... Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2A35EA60C3C77D438915767F458D65687E8F8658>