From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Mar  7 09:31:50 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DF1416A4CE
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>;
	Sun,  7 Mar 2004 09:31:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp3b.sentex.ca (smtp3b.sentex.ca [205.211.164.50])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0142643D1F
	for <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>;
	Sun,  7 Mar 2004 09:31:50 -0800 (PST)	(envelope-from mike@sentex.net)
Received: from avscan1.sentex.ca (avscan1.sentex.ca [199.212.134.11])
	by smtp3b.sentex.ca (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i27HViYD089109;
	Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:31:44 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from mike@sentex.net)
Received: from lava.sentex.ca (pyroxene.sentex.ca [199.212.134.18])
	by avscan1.sentex.ca (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i27HVl5g070841;
	Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:31:47 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from mike@sentex.net)
Received: from simian.sentex.net ([192.168.43.27])
	by lava.sentex.ca (8.12.9p2/8.12.9) with ESMTP id i27HVjZa073919;
	Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:31:46 -0500 (EST)
	(envelope-from mike@sentex.net)
Message-Id: <6.0.3.0.0.20040307122842.062e0e20@209.112.4.2>
X-Sender: mdtpop@209.112.4.2 (Unverified)
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.0.3.0
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 12:32:59 -0500
To: David Sze <dsze@alumni.uwaterloo.ca>
From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net>
In-Reply-To: <20040307172347.GA40032@mail.distrust.net>
References: <20040306130937.N71806@ganymede.hub.org>
 <6.0.3.0.0.20040306180314.08adede0@209.112.4.2>
 <20040306210515.M13247@ganymede.hub.org>
 <20040306211328.H13247@ganymede.hub.org>
 <6.0.3.0.0.20040306210359.08fc35a8@209.112.4.2>
 <20040307172347.GA40032@mail.distrust.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new
cc: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Odd network issue ... *very* slow scp between two servers
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code
	<freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 17:31:50 -0000

At 12:23 PM 07/03/2004, David Sze wrote:
>On Sat, Mar 06, 2004 at 09:11:09PM -0500, Mike Tancsa wrote:
> >
> > I would in the following order
> > a) check the settings on the switch. AutoNeg *only* works when both sides
> > are set to auto-neg. If both sides are not auto, make sure both sides are
> > the same for speed and duplex settings.
>
>To add to this point, even with both sides set to AutoNeg, it seems there
>can still be problems with em devices.

Yes, the readme speaks to this point that the nic does not play well with 
some switches

src/sys/dev/em/README

There is also a suggested work around you might try.  But in marc's case, I 
would say it was more a matter of a classic duplex mismatch.

         ---Mike