Date: Fri, 14 Nov 1997 16:43:44 -0800 (PST) From: Eric Anderson <keric@websidestory.com> To: David Greenman <dg@root.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Ethernet problem with 2.2.5 and 3C509B Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.96.971114164134.18807G-100000@mail.websidestory.com> In-Reply-To: <199711142131.NAA09421@implode.root.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 14 Nov 1997, David Greenman wrote: > >bash-2.01$ netstat -i > >Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts Oerrs Coll > >fxp0 1500 <Link> 00.a0.c9.6e.e5.xx 10023234 0 8567462 0 4867357 > >fxp0 1500 hitbox-netblk xxx 10023234 0 8567462 0 4867357 > >lo0 16384 <Link> 50 0 50 0 0 > >lo0 16384 127 localhost 50 0 50 0 0 > >bash-2.01$ > > > >Of course, these machines are experiencing huge data loads (2+ million > >hits/day) BUT.. we also have a couple of machines with the 3Com 905 NICs > >getting the same traffic load and: > > > >bash-2.01$ netstat -i > >Name Mtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts Oerrs Coll > >vx0 1500 <Link> 00.60.97.b5.a3.xx 5855565 0 5020088 0 30 > >vx0 1500 hitbox-netblk xxx 5855565 0 5020088 0 30 > >lo0 16384 <Link> 28 0 28 0 0 > >lo0 16384 127 localhost 28 0 28 0 0 > >bash-2.01$ > > I'm not sure I understand what the problem is. Please explain the nature > of the problem you are having - other than the collision rate being a bit > high, I don't see anything wrong with the above numbers. Why are the 3Com cards so much more efficient? Why are the collision rates on the Intel cards sky high, and the collision rates on the 3Com's so low? > You mentioned that you tried setting full duplex...what is the machine > connected to? It must be connected to a switch for full duplex to > work. Moreover, if the switch is a Cisco Catalyst (or Cisco router), > you have to configure the switch port explicitly to full duplex - it > will not autonegotiate. Ahhh.. funny you should say that - we have Cisco Catalyst switches. RTFM eh? (forgive me, I'm new to Cisco switches) > Also, you mentioned that you are messing with the -link ifconfig flags. > This tells me that you aren't running 2.2.5, -stable, or -current, since > in all of those cases, the method for setting the duplex and speed is entirely > different. I'm actually planning a full network upgrade to 2.2.5, but I'm trying to deal with one issue at a time. Thanks for the tips - the Cisco tip is duly noted! -- -------------------------------------------------------------------- Eric Anderson Web Side Story * San Diego, CA <keric@websidestory.com> <http://www.websidestory.com/>; Director of Network Operations --------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSI.3.96.971114164134.18807G-100000>