From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sun Mar 22 23:03:50 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 A27CC2704DA for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 23:03:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gpalmer@freebsd.org) Received: from mail.in-addr.com (mail.in-addr.com [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:61e8::2525:2525]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48ltNk2SdZz3KKl for ; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 23:03:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from gpalmer@freebsd.org) Received: from gjp by mail.in-addr.com with local (Exim 4.92.3 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1jG9d5-0002Gg-PI; Sun, 22 Mar 2020 23:03:39 +0000 Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 23:03:39 +0000 From: Gary Palmer To: Dan Langille Cc: sthaug@nethelp.no, "Pieper, Jeffrey E" , freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: SFP+ on PRO/10GbE Message-ID: <20200322230339.GB5808@in-addr.com> References: <2A35EA60C3C77D438915767F458D6568B90935EC@ORSMSX111.amr.corp.intel.com> <20200322.214355.415142200.sthaug@nethelp.no> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: gpalmer@freebsd.org X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on mail.in-addr.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 48ltNk2SdZz3KKl X-Spamd-Bar: + Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [1.51 / 15.00]; local_wl_from(0.00)[freebsd.org]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.71)[0.711,0]; NEURAL_SPAM_LONG(0.80)[0.798,0]; ASN(0.00)[asn:24940, ipnet:2a01:4f8::/29, country:DE] 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 23:03:50 -0000 On Sun, Mar 22, 2020 at 05:11:20PM -0400, Dan Langille wrote: > On Sun, Mar 22, 2020, at 4:43 PM, sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: > > > 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? > > The only SFP+ capable switches I have are Unifi. > > I just tried the other switch (US-48) which had one SFP+ port free. Same issues there. Did the Unifi switch see the SFP+ optics on the switch end? What happens if you take the SFP+ module from the server and put it in the other Unifi switch and try establishing a link between the two switches? Gary