From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Jun 15 23:50:21 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC1861065678;
	Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:50:21 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from artem_kim@inbox.ru)
Received: from mx38.mail.ru (mx38.mail.ru [94.100.176.52])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 750788FC0C;
	Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:50:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [79.142.107.13] (port=5950 helo=tt.tt.tt)
	by mx38.mail.ru with asmtp 
	id 1OOftb-000NIL-00; Wed, 16 Jun 2010 03:50:19 +0400
From: Artem Kim <artem_kim@inbox.ru>
To: pyunyh@gmail.com
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2010 03:50:39 +0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.12.4 (FreeBSD/8.1-PRERELEASE; KDE/4.3.5; amd64; ; )
References: <201006131934.11389.artem_kim@inbox.ru>
	<201006160257.01213.artem_kim@inbox.ru>
	<20100615232108.GM4257@michelle.cdnetworks.com>
In-Reply-To: <20100615232108.GM4257@michelle.cdnetworks.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201006160350.39502.artem_kim@inbox.ru>
X-Spam: Not detected
X-Mras: Ok
Cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, yongari@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Problems with bge (possibly related to r208993)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2010 23:50:21 -0000

On Wednesday 16 June 2010 03:21:09 Pyun YongHyeon wrote:

> Hmm, why you need link0 flag? The link0 flag is used to force the
> interface MASTER. Normally this configuration is automatically
> done during auto-negotiation such that one is configured as MASTER
> and the other is configured as SLAVE. If you manually configure
> this setting you should be very careful not to use the same
> configuration of MASTER/SLAVE of link partner. If you have to use
> link0 option, the link partner should be configured to use SLAVE.
> Normally you should always use auto-negotiation on 1000baseT unless
> link partner is severely broken to support NWAY.
> 
> It seems link partner does not agree on resolved speed/duplex
> configuration of bge1. Check link partner's resolved link
> configuration.
> 

In any case, now I do not use the flag link0. 
Now the master/slave is  assigned through auto-negotiation. 

link0 not been set before the problem occurred. I reset link0 flag on NAS2 
when I got a problem the first time.

Now x900 port1.0.12 and bge0 configured automatically.

>bge1: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
>        media: Ethernet autoselect (1000baseT <full-duplex>)
>        status: active

>awplus>show int port1.0.12 status
>Port       Name               Status           Vlan Duplex   Speed Type
>port1.0.12                    connected          55 a-full  a-1000 1000BASE-T