From owner-freebsd-current Sat Oct 11 07:05:12 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id HAA20716 for current-outgoing; Sat, 11 Oct 1997 07:05:12 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current) Received: from haywire.dialix.com.au (news@haywire.dialix.com.au [202.12.86.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id HAA20708 for ; Sat, 11 Oct 1997 07:05:05 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from usenet-request@haywire.dialix.com.au) Received: (from news@localhost) by haywire.dialix.com.au id WAA23060 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Sat, 11 Oct 1997 22:04:50 +0800 (WST) (envelope-from usenet-request@haywire.dialix.com.au) X-Authentication-Warning: haywire.dialix.com.au: news set sender to usenet-request@haywire.dialix.com using -f Received: from GATEWAY by haywire.dialix.com.au with netnews for freebsd-current@freebsd.org (problems to: usenet@haywire.dialix.com) To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Date: 11 Oct 1997 14:04:50 GMT From: peter@netplex.com.au (Peter Wemm) Message-ID: <876578689.767862@haywire.dialix.com.au> Organization: DIALix Internet Services References: Subject: Re: Which PCI Ethernet card is best for FreeBSD-current? Sender: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk In article <5652.875828050@critter.freebsd.dk>, phk@critter.freebsd.dk (Poul-Henning Kamp) writes: > In message , Tom w > rites: >> >>On Thu, 2 Oct 1997, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> >>> In message <9023.875816283@verdi.nethelp.no>, sthaug@nethelp.no writes: >>> >> On the other hand, the only quad cards I know of are based >>> >> on the DEC chip; I'll be trying out the Znyx quad card (I think) soon. >>> > >>> >We have the ZNYX 4-port 10 Mbps card, and the SMC 2-port 100 Mbps card >>> >in a FreeBSD machine here. They work very well for us. >>> >>> I have a machine with 4 of the ZNYX boards (16 ports total) doing the >>> "collapsed backbone" thing. Works like a charm, and in difference >>> from a cisco that would cost 10 times as much, you can run tcpdump >>> and trafshow on it :-) >> >> I would have liked to have been able to use a solution like that. >>However, currently ethernet interfaces that do not have carrier/link >>active, still show us UP. I wish that loss of carrier/link would force >>the interface into a DOWN state automatically. I realize this would >>require some driver changes. > > Well, go for it :-) The de driver already does this, but in a different way: peter@spinner[8:59pm]~-102> ifconfig de0 de0: flags=8843 mtu 1500 inet 202.12.86.3 netmask 0xffffffe0 broadcast 202.12.86.31 ether 00:e0:29:06:48:ee media: autoselect (10baseT/UTP) status: active [yank cable] peter@spinner[9:39pm]~-103> ifconfig de0 de0: flags=8c43 mtu 1500 inet 202.12.86.3 netmask 0xffffffe0 broadcast 202.12.86.31 ether 00:e0:29:06:48:ee media: autoselect [plug back in] peter@spinner[9:39pm]~-104> ifconfig de0 de0: flags=8843 mtu 1500 inet 202.12.86.3 netmask 0xffffffe0 broadcast 202.12.86.31 ether 00:e0:29:06:48:ee media: autoselect (10baseT/UTP) status: active peter@spinner[9:39pm]~-105> Or, if you have the media hardwired, you get this: peter@spinner[9:41pm]/home/peter-100# ifconfig de0 media 10baseT/UTP peter@spinner[9:41pm]/home/peter-101# ifconfig de0 de0: flags=8843 mtu 1500 inet 202.12.86.3 netmask 0xffffffe0 broadcast 202.12.86.31 ether 00:e0:29:06:48:ee media: 10baseT/UTP status: active [yank cable] peter@spinner[9:41pm]/home/peter-102# ifconfig de0 de0: flags=8843 mtu 1500 inet 202.12.86.3 netmask 0xffffffe0 broadcast 202.12.86.31 ether 00:e0:29:06:48:ee media: 10baseT/UTP status: no carrier ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ However, the driver seems to have a bug here.. Once the cable is plugged back in, the 'no carrier' status doesn't go away. :-> Not even after using the interface again... Cheers, -Peter