Date: Tue, 31 May 2005 11:52:10 +0900 (JST) From: Tod McQuillin <devin@spamcop.net> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: Imobach ??? Sosa <imobachgs@banot.net>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Sebastian Ahndorf <webmaster@it-is-warlock.de> Subject: Re: Poor network performance: a lot of timeouts Message-ID: <20050531115114.I727@plexi.pun-pun.prv> In-Reply-To: <20050530225340.GA34233@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <20050529221024.4fu2p4yjusk04k0g@mail.banot.net> <20050529212705.GA64753@xor.obsecurity.org> <1117447400.5384.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20050530104928.GB79877@sr.se> <1117465224.9934.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <429B44BD.7070806@pp.nic.fi> <20050530191843.GA82875@xor.obsecurity.org> <429B7DF6.8040704@it-is-warlock.de> <20050530225340.GA34233@xor.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 30 May 2005, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 10:56:22PM +0200, Sebastian Ahndorf wrote: >> Kris Kennaway wrote: >>>> Both sides must have same config, autosense should work if there is no >>>> config possibility in other end. >>> >>> >>> autosense may in fact not work, especially on low-quality NICs like rl. >>> >> >> I don't agree to that. >> I had similar problems with my network using a cheap switch with some >> realtek nics. I had the nics running 100baseTX Full Duplex. >> Changing this to autosense made the problems gone. > > Your one example does not disprove the statement. I've seen this > problem myself, and so have many others. I found this document extremely helpful in understanding ethernet autonegotiation, especially the table on page 7: https://myvision.flukenetworks.com/edocs/efile.asp?oid=2040882 Good luck, -- Tod
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050531115114.I727>