From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Feb 6 00:49:15 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA18792 for questions-outgoing; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 00:49:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from gatekeeper.barcode.co.il (gatekeeper.barcode.co.il [192.116.93.17]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA18729; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 00:48:53 -0800 (PST) Received: (from smap@localhost) by gatekeeper.barcode.co.il (8.7.5/8.6.12) id KAA01672; Thu, 6 Feb 1997 10:49:04 +0200 (IST) X-Authentication-Warning: gatekeeper.barcode.co.il: smap set sender to using -f Received: from localhost.barcode.co.il(127.0.0.1) by gatekeeper.barcode.co.il via smap (V1.3) id sma001670; Thu Feb 6 10:48:59 1997 Message-ID: <32F99A64.FCB@barcode.co.il> Date: Thu, 06 Feb 1997 10:46:28 +0200 From: Nadav Eiron X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (X11; I; SunOS 5.5 sun4m) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Softweyr LLC CC: "Jin Guojun[ITG]" , questions@freebsd.org, hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: DEC 21040 v.s. DEC 21140 chip for ethernet cards References: <199702060051.RAA08170@xmission.xmission.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Softweyr LLC wrote: > > > Would someone please give me some information about the difference > > between ethernet cards using DEC 21040 and DEC 21140 chips? > > Is 21040 chip for 10BT and 21140 for 100 BT? > > Yes. > > -- > "Where am I, and what am I doing in this handbasket?" > > Wes Peters Softweyr LLC > http://www.xmission.com/~softweyr softweyr@xmission.com Note that there are newer variants for both: For 10BaseT there is the 21041 (works fine). For 100BaseT there is the 21140-AC (needs some patching to the driver sometimes, search the archives for recent postings) and the 21142 (never tried it on FreeBSD). Nadav