From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Sep 18 22:39:07 1996 Return-Path: owner-hackers Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id WAA23589 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 22:39:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from whistle.com (s205m131.whistle.com [207.76.205.131]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id WAA23556 for ; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 22:39:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from smap@localhost) by whistle.com (8.7.5/8.6.12) id WAA11811; Wed, 18 Sep 1996 22:38:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from current1.whistle.com(207.76.205.22) by whistle.com via smap (V1.3) id sma011807; Wed Sep 18 22:37:47 1996 Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 22:36:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: rohit@cs.UMD.EDU cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Giant Sized Ethernet Packets In-Reply-To: <199609190233.WAA18658@darling.cs.UMD.EDU> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk funny you should mentionned that.. we use the above mentionned hardware to produce GIANT packets on a proprietary network.. your packets are basically normal Our packets are 15.5KB. i.e. 10x noraml size. If you look in the DE driver you will see references to #ifdef BIG_PACKET these are for us (TRW) On Wed, 18 Sep 1996 rohit@cs.UMD.EDU wrote: > > Hi, > > I was wondering if it is possible to send giant sized ethernet packets (>1500 > bytes say 1550) using the current 'de' driver for the SMC 10/100 DEC 21140 HAH! call that a giant packet? THIS is a Giant packet... "TRW image system "BP protocol" :) > cards. > > If not, would somebody know if this is possible with the above h/w > at all? > > Any pointers to other h/w over which giant packets are possible would ohhhhh yeaaaahhhhh, 1550? just change the mtu :) Our stuff requires a little differnt programming of the chip. > be appreciated. > > Thanks in advance. > > Rohit. > (rohit@cs.umd.edu) > > PS: Please CC any repsonses to rohit@cs.umd.edu. I have limited internet > connectivity and therefore am currently not subscribed to the > hackers list. >