From owner-freebsd-stable Wed Dec 26 11:18: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from rfnj.org (rfnj.org [216.239.237.194]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07E7337B4EC for ; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 11:17:50 -0800 (PST) Received: from megalomaniac.biosys.net (megalomaniac.rfnj.org [216.239.237.200]) by rfnj.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E1ED4137DB; Wed, 26 Dec 2001 14:18:43 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20011226141409.00b02048@rfnj.org> X-Sender: asym@rfnj.org X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1 Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 14:17:21 -0500 To: sthaug@nethelp.no From: Allen Landsidel Subject: Re: 4.5 PRERELEASE - Call for testing Cc: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <3051.1009393494@verdi.nethelp.no> References: <5.1.0.14.0.20011226125628.00b08e10@rfnj.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 08:04 PM 12/26/2001 +0100, sthaug@nethelp.no wrote: > > Tom's reply stated that if you turned auto-negotiation off by forcing a > > speed/duplex setting on either end that it would cause problems. This > > simply isn't true because you can't turn auto-negotating off, and > forcing a > > speed/duplex setting doesn't do this.. what it does do is forces the other > > end to negotiate this setting, if it is available. The negotiation still > > occurs. > >It's certainly possible that we're using the wrong terminology. The >observation still stands (supported by *lots* of examples in practice): >If you manually set duplex at one end, and leave it unconfigured (ie. >auto-negotiation) at the other end, you will often get a duplex mismatch. > >Please don't try to claim that this doesn't happen. It does - even with >new equipment from well known manufacturers. I'll claim I've never seen it so long as I was using auto-negotiating devices.. nics from linksys, 3com, intel and others.. switches and hubs from the same three. You (and Tom) have still both failed to address the question posed : What about "dumb" devices such as unmanaged switches. My 16port auto-negotiating 10/100 switch has no way *at all* of setting the duplex *or* speed of the ports.. are you stating that such devices (and there are tons of them) won't work if you force the NIC to a certain speed/duplex setting? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message