Niels Bakker wrote: > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Mark Tech) [Mon 08 Dec 2008, 17:04 CET]: >> If I want to enable port speed to 1Gbps, I get the following options, >> telnet#speed-duplex? >> 10-full 10M, full duplex >> 10-half 10M, half duplex >> 100-full 100M, full duplex >> 100-half 100M, half duplex >> 1000-full-master 1G, full duplex, master >> 1000-full-slave 1G, full duplex, slave >> auto Autonegotiation >> >> What is the difference/concept behind the master - slave config? > > http://kc.forticare.com/default.asp?id=3780&Lang=1 came up in a quick > google search, you may find it enlightening - especially the bit about > autonegotiation being required for 1000baseT by the IEEE
Although there may have been improvements in auto-negotiation, the following statement from the article is untrue: 'The notion of “auto-negotiation is unreliable” can no longer be substantiated.' Considering in the past 6 months I have run into 4 endpoints that had auto-negotiation issues, I would argue that statements like this are not definitive and are not necessarily correct. Given, all of this equipment was connecting at 100 Mb, not 1Gb, but there are times when specifying your port speed is necessary. I would say that in 99.9% of cases auto-negotiation is reliable, but you may run into times when there are issues. (The end points had issues connecting to both Foundry and Cisco switches on different cable paths including a regular patch cable.) Tim _______________________________________________ foundry-nsp mailing list [email protected] http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp
