From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 5 11:56:07 2005 Return-Path: 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 DC57516A4CE for ; Sat, 5 Mar 2005 11:56:07 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail15.syd.optusnet.com.au (mail15.syd.optusnet.com.au [211.29.132.196]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40FB043D31 for ; Sat, 5 Mar 2005 11:56:07 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from PeterJeremy@optushome.com.au) Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (c211-30-75-229.belrs2.nsw.optusnet.com.au [211.30.75.229]) j25Bu5Qq002027 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Sat, 5 Mar 2005 22:56:05 +1100 Received: from cirb503493.alcatel.com.au (localhost.alcatel.com.au [127.0.0.1])j25Bu47l008991; Sat, 5 Mar 2005 22:56:05 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from pjeremy@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au) Received: (from pjeremy@localhost)j25Bu4U1008990; Sat, 5 Mar 2005 22:56:04 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from pjeremy) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 22:56:04 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy To: Doug White Message-ID: <20050305115604.GD4394@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> References: <20050303.181823.216808984.kasahara@nc.kyushu-u.ac.jp> <20050304233814.U4084@carver.gumbysoft.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050304233814.U4084@carver.gumbysoft.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2i cc: stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: 1000baseTX? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 11:56:08 -0000 On Fri, 2005-Mar-04 23:39:36 -0800, Doug White wrote: >On Thu, 3 Mar 2005, Yoshiaki Kasahara wrote: > >> In man pages, dmesg and ifconfig of FreeBSD5, GbE operation over >> twisted pair is mostly referred as '1000baseTX'. I guess most of them >> should be replaced by '1000baseT'. 1000base"TX" and 1000base"T" are >> different standard and they are not compatible ("TX" needs CAT6 cable >> and uses pairs in different way). Also 1000baseTX support is very >> rare yet. I'm sorry I'm not sure if some devices really support "TX". > >Do you have any documentation to back up this claim? I'm not sure about the pairing but there are two distinct standards for gigabit ethernet over UTP. Try typing "1000base-t 1000base-tx differences" (without the quotes) into Google. -- Peter Jeremy