Dear all,
Pls kindly help the following:
Really I am not understand although it is simple.
We colocate the router (2511) to our provider data center. Which having two
ethernet interface. One connecting to date center internet and one is
connecting to our own LAN (which is private ip address). So
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 02 December 2002 11:24
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Collision [7:58389]
Dear all,
Pls kindly help the following:
Really I am not understand although it is simple.
We colocate the router (2511) to our provider data center. Which having
two
ethernet interface. One
Today, We are put 3660 router to their end, having Fastethernet card, and
connected to their switch.
They change their switch port as following:
interface FastEthernet0/14
load-interval 30
duplex full
so far, after observe serveral hours, there is no collision as well as not
error message in o
Most likely the previous 10/half interface on the switch and the router
were not
linked at the same speed/duplex or the other router had an issue with
the setting.
To be safe I would set the switch port and the router interface to
100/full or 10/full
and there should be no issues then.
and yes
Larry Letterman wrote:
>
> Most likely the previous 10/half interface on the switch and
> the router
> were not
> linked at the same speed/duplex or the other router had an
> issue with
> the setting.
No, the switch and router were set to the same thing, which was 10 Mbps half
duplex, if you read
set one end to 100 half and the other to 100 full and see what happens:)
Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
>Larry Letterman wrote:
>
>>Most likely the previous 10/half interface on the switch and
>>the router
>>were not
>>linked at the same speed/duplex or the other router had an
>>issue with
>>th
Larry Letterman wrote:
>
> set one end to 100 half and the other to 100 full and see what
> happens:)
I mentioned the duplex mismatch problem too, but it has nothing to do with
his question or problem.
The key to troubleshooting is to address the actual problem, not some
assumption you make
Not the last word, but you imply that the collisions are only due to
capacity...
and I can have the wrong match on both ends and get plenty of collisions
with no
capacity issue.and I reserve the last word as always for you...where
have you been lately,
I have missed you :)
Priscilla O
Larry Letterman wrote:
>
> Not the last word, but you imply that the collisions are only
> due to
> capacity...
> and I can have the wrong match on both ends and get plenty of
> collisions
> with no
> capacity issue.
It is a capcity issue. A collision results when the station set to half
dupl
rue if the frame is 100Mb in size, but if it is a 1500 byte
frame, then surely there is no difference in the capability of a 10Mb or
100Mb Ethernet to pass the frame?
Symon
-Original Message-----
From: Larry Letterman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 03 December 2002 23:02
To: [EMAIL PROTECTE
ay be true if the frame is 100Mb in size, but if it is a
> 1500 byte
> frame, then surely there is no difference in the capability of
> a 10Mb or
> 100Mb Ethernet to pass the frame?
>
> Symon
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Larry Letterman [mailto:[EMAIL P
11 matches
Mail list logo
