From owner-freebsd-amd64@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 19 20:41:36 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D31016A4CE for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:41:36 +0000 (GMT) Received: from error404.nls.net (error404.nls.net [216.144.36.24]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D41243D39 for ; Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:41:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from ketrien@error404.nls.net) Received: from error404.nls.net (ketrien@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by error404.nls.net (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j3JKkKHt068858; Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:46:20 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from ketrien@error404.nls.net) Received: (from ketrien@localhost)j3JKkKtI068857; Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:46:20 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from ketrien) Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:46:20 -0400 From: "Ketrien I. Saihr-Kesenchedra" To: Ken Gunderson Message-ID: <20050419204620.GC63598@bahre.achedra.org> Mail-Followup-To: Ken Gunderson , freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org References: <20050419150335.46904.qmail@web60003.mail.yahoo.com> <4ca1c184ef042a708644d731f39d92e8@khera.org> <20050419143013.47a457ff.kgunders@teamcool.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050419143013.47a457ff.kgunders@teamcool.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.83/841/Tue Apr 19 12:44:10 2005 on bahre.achedra.org X-Virus-Status: Clean cc: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Subject: Re: designing new freebsd server for amd64 arch X-BeenThere: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to the AMD64 platform List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 20:41:36 -0000 On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 02:30:13PM -0600, Ken Gunderson wrote: > The K8S Pro has a 3rd LAN- good old 10/100. Does anyone know if it's > using the same or different driver? My guess would be that it's > different and hence should work. If so, a bit of patience should > remove immediate need for Intel nics. The 10/100 is an i82559 IIRC, using fxp(4). Might be a 558 though. -ksaihr