From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Mar 19 16:19:31 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B372A106564A for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:19:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fox@verio.net) Received: from dfw-smtpout2.email.verio.net (dfw-smtpout2.email.verio.net [129.250.36.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63B828FC39 for ; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:19:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fox@verio.net) Received: from [129.250.36.64] (helo=dfw-mmp4.email.verio.net) by dfw-smtpout2.email.verio.net with esmtp id 1Jc10i-0005EI-0C for freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:19:28 +0000 Received: from [129.250.40.241] (helo=limbo.int.dllstx01.us.it.verio.net) by dfw-mmp4.email.verio.net with esmtp id 1Jc10h-0001Jr-T4 for freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:19:27 +0000 Received: by limbo.int.dllstx01.us.it.verio.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B4B0F8E296; Wed, 19 Mar 2008 11:19:22 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 11:19:22 -0500 From: David DeSimone To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <20080319161922.GE24197@verio.net> Mail-Followup-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org References: <47DE4E96.8080507@FreeBSD.org> <20080318223404.GB24011@verio.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-action=pgp-signed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Cc: Subject: Re: Frequent pauses with Linux-based router X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:19:31 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Sean C. Farley wrote: > > Ah! I tried it again at 10Mb without setting it to full-duplex, and > it worked. Out of curiosity, is it normal that 100Mb will default to > full-duplex yet 10Mb will not, or is it dependent on the hardware? Speed and duplex are set independently of each other. It does not matter what you set the speed to, it only matters that you forced the duplex setting on one end of the link, without forcing the same setting on the other end of the link. The rule is that both ends of the link must use the same settings, either both forced, or both auto. It turns out that speed settings can be reliably detected by the other end of the link, but duplex can NOT. A duplex mismatch is thus a very common condition, and is usually only detected by "slow network response" being the symptom. - -- David DeSimone == Network Admin == fox@verio.net "This email message is intended for the use of the person to whom it has been sent, and may contain information that is confidential or legally protected. If you are not the intended recipient or have received this message in error, you are not authorized to copy, dis- tribute, or otherwise use this message or its attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and permanently delete this message and any attachments. Verio, Inc. makes no warranty that this email is error or virus free. Thank you." --Lawyer Bot 6000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFH4T0KFSrKRjX5eCoRAiCLAJ9qEEMWGOmjLT153p5vunhwD90XmACgn8Lv 6GZOlfz5DLlR3mTD3qAKtJA= =+k2X -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----