From owner-freebsd-stable Mon Jan 22 6:12:24 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mailgate.abacus.co.uk (unknown [194.130.48.21]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61E0437B400 for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 06:12:04 -0800 (PST) Received: from abacus.co.uk (pcantony.bl.abacus.co.uk [194.130.48.111]) by mailgate.abacus.co.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA01260; Mon, 22 Jan 2001 14:08:29 GMT Message-ID: <3A6C257A.140E27C2@abacus.co.uk> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 12:20:10 +0000 From: Antony T Curtis Organization: Abacus Polar PLC (UK) X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.76 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 4.1.1-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Paul A. Howes" Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: New Intel NICs... References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Paul A. Howes" wrote: > > All- > > I know FreeBSD has great support for the Intel EtherExpress Pro 10 and 100B > series cards. I was just checking Intel's web site, and they seem to have > phased out the 100B in favor of a 100S, which incorporates harware-based > encryption, and a "new-and-improved" version of the chip, dubbed the > "82550". Are our drivers still compatible with the new card? Also, can our > drivers take advantage of the encryption? ROTFL! Isn't the 82550A UART chips for serial comms? Nothing like a bit of chip numbering to confuse everyone. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message