From owner-freebsd-net Tue Jul 27 17:46:27 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from scam.xcf.berkeley.edu (scam.XCF.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.43.201]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D441614D97 for ; Tue, 27 Jul 1999 17:46:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from grady@scam.XCF.Berkeley.EDU) Received: (qmail 5026 invoked by uid 348); 28 Jul 1999 00:46:05 -0000 Received: from localhost (HELO scam.XCF.Berkeley.EDU) (sendmail-bs@127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 28 Jul 1999 00:46:05 -0000 To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: network hangs From: grady@xcf.berkeley.edu (Steven Grady) In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 26 Jul 1999 07:26:15 -0400 (EDT) <199907261126.HAA93252@bilver.magicnet.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: <5022.933122764.1@scam.XCF.Berkeley.EDU> Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 17:46:05 -0700 Message-Id: <19990728004624.D441614D97@hub.freebsd.org> Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I got a response to my question; I thought I'd reply to the list. > I have a question about this. > > > dmesg output related to networking: > > > > de0: rev 0x22 int a irq 12 on pci0.10.0 > > de0: Asanta 21140A [10-100Mb/s] pass 2.2 > > de0: address aa:bb:cc:dd:ee:ff > > de0: enabling 10baseT port > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > de1: rev 0x22 int a irq 12 on pci0.11.0 > > de1: Asanta 21140A [10-100Mb/s] pass 2.2 > > de1: address gg:hh:ii:jj:kk:ll > > de1: enabling 10baseT port > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > Shouldn't that be 100baseT? Or does the kernel not report this. I'm not sure, but the connection is definitely 100 Mbit, as verified by a fast transfer of a large file But meanwhile, we reconfigured the interface to talk at 10Mbit, but that didn't help. > It's been so long since I've booted one of my machines I've > forgotten. How I envy you... > I know sometimes some switches have a bit of difficulty in this. > > You mentioned it happened on two different BSD system. The > question is (and I couldn't tell this from your answer) - was > the other BSD system also on this network or was it on a > totally unrelated/unconnected network. If it's the former it might > not be a BSD problem. It was this network, but I still think it's likely to be FreeBSD's fault. Latest data point: when the communication goes down, other machines (Win98, Mac) speaking through a hub directly to the DSL line (as opposed to through the FreeBSD gateway) can still access the network. It's just the FreeBSD machine that stops talking to it. BTW, we are just about out of options. We have installed 3.2, but that hasn't helped. We configured the internal interface to use 10Mbit instead of 100Mbit, and it seems to make the problems occur more rarely, but they still happen. We recompiled if_de.c with some of the debugging flags turned on, but no messages are being generated. Obviously a gateway that need to be rebooted multiple times per day is not an acceptable situation, so we will probably have to switch away from FreeBSD. I hate to switch to Linux, but my guess that if FreeBSD has this problem, then other BSDs do as well. Does anyone have any final suggestions before we give up on FreeBSD for our gateway (what a sad state of affairs)? Steven "You'd better ask yourself `Do I feel lucky?' Well, do you, punk?" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message