From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sun Mar 22 20:44:07 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C434326C228 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 20:44:07 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sthaug@nethelp.no) Received: from bizet.nethelp.no (bizet.nethelp.no [IPv6:2001:8c0:9e04:500::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48lqHS1gntz45L0 for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 20:44:03 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sthaug@nethelp.no) Received: from localhost (bizet.nethelp.no [IPv6:2001:8c0:9e04:500::1]) by bizet.nethelp.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C496E607D; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 21:43:55 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 21:43:55 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <20200322.214355.415142200.sthaug@nethelp.no> To: dan@langille.org Cc: jeffrey.e.pieper@intel.com, freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SFP+ on PRO/10GbE From: sthaug@nethelp.no In-Reply-To: References: <2A35EA60C3C77D438915767F458D6568B90935EC@ORSMSX111.amr.corp.intel.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.7 on Emacs 26 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 48lqHS1gntz45L0 X-Spamd-Bar: +++ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of sthaug@nethelp.no designates 2001:8c0:9e04:500::1 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=sthaug@nethelp.no X-Spamd-Result: default: False [3.06 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[nethelp.no]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.68)[0.685,0]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.73)[0.734,0]; FROM_NO_DN(0.00)[]; MID_CONTAINS_FROM(1.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; RCVD_NO_TLS_LAST(0.10)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:2116, ipnet:2001:8c0::/29, country:NO]; IP_SCORE(0.24)[asn: 2116(1.23), country: NO(-0.01)]; ONCE_RECEIVED(0.10)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 20:44:07 -0000 > Partial success. The card is now able to use an SFP+ optic. It warns me > when the optic is installed: > > Mar 22 16:49:45 r720-01 kernel: WARNING: Intel (R) Network Connections are quality tested using Intel (R) Ethernet Optics. Using untested modules is not supported and may cause unstable operation or damage to the module or the adapter. Intel Corporation is not responsible for any harm caused by using untested modules. > > I cannot use an SFP+ optic at the switch. The connection just does not happen. > > If I go back to the original SFP optic, the connection occurs, as expected at 1G. > > On the switch side, I've tried a known good optic from an existing connection. > > I could install an PRO/10GbE instead, that has a built-in transceiver. I have > two of those in use now, both working on 10G. Have you tried connected it to something other than the Unifi switch? I have two Dell R430 servers running 12.1-STABLE, using Intel X520 DP 10Gb DA/SFP+ cards with non-Intel branded LR optics. Works fine with hw.ix.unsupported_sfp=1 setting - one of them connected to a Juniper MX480 router, the other to an Extreme X670 switch. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no