> <<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >> The maximum for full-duplex is utterly irrelevant, since the bounds on
> >> performance for half-duplex Ethernet networks come from CSMA/CD.
>
> > I will say it one last time, duplex falls out of the equations when you
> > solve for ``maximal''.
>
> Nonsense.
< said:
>> The maximum for full-duplex is utterly irrelevant, since the bounds on
>> performance for half-duplex Ethernet networks come from CSMA/CD.
> I will say it one last time, duplex falls out of the equations when you
> solve for ``maximal''.
Nonsense.
> It has 0 meaning in the numbers
> <<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >> I answered SPECIFICALLY about half-duplex.
>
> > The duplex does not in any way effect the maximal link layer transmission
> > data rate. You seem to keep forgetting the maximal part...
>
> The maximum for full-duplex is utterly irrelevant, since the bounds
< said:
>> I answered SPECIFICALLY about half-duplex.
> The duplex does not in any way effect the maximal link layer transmission
> data rate. You seem to keep forgetting the maximal part...
The maximum for full-duplex is utterly irrelevant, since the bounds on
performance for half-duplex Ethe
> <<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> > I specifically excluded P(coll) by stating point to point or effectively
> > point to point via switching.
>
> Rod, please bother to READ what people write before spewing nonsense.
I did read it, and did not spew nonsense. P(coll) is non-sense when
talking ab
< said:
> I specifically excluded P(coll) by stating point to point or effectively
> point to point via switching.
Rod, please bother to READ what people write before spewing nonsense.
The original question asked SPECIFICALLY about half-duplex.
I answered SPECIFICALLY about half-duplex.
End O
> <<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> >> [I wrote:]
> >> quite right. In a CSMA/CD medium access protocol, like that used by
> >> Ethernet, the actual capacity of the link is always(*) somewhat less than
> >> 100%; the exact value depends on the precise parameters of the
> >> transmissions at both en
> On Fri, Feb 25, 2000 at 01:25:59AM -0800, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
> >
> > There was a patch of DC21143 chips it seems that has a very strange
> > thermal problem. Can you tell me what your hub link lite is doing
> > when you see this major slow down?
>
> Nope ... as this machine is connected
< said:
>> [I wrote:]
>> quite right. In a CSMA/CD medium access protocol, like that used by
>> Ethernet, the actual capacity of the link is always(*) somewhat less than
>> 100%; the exact value depends on the precise parameters of the
>> transmissions at both ends.(**)
>> (*)In non-trivial con
At 1:13 AM -0800 2000/2/25, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
> So infact the Layer 2 maximal data rate of 100BaseTX is 97.5929Mb/s or
> 12.1912MB/s. I'll leave the Layer 3 to 7 calculation up to the reader,
> as I am a hardware geek and I showed you how to do the calculations
> at the hardwire layer,
On Fri, Feb 25, 2000 at 01:25:59AM -0800, Rodney W. Grimes wrote:
>
> There was a patch of DC21143 chips it seems that has a very strange
> thermal problem. Can you tell me what your hub link lite is doing
> when you see this major slow down?
Nope ... as this machine is connected directly to th
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 02:07:40PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> > < said:
> > Assuming you mean ``100BASE-T (half duplex)'' here... This is not
> > quite right. In a CSMA/CD medium access protocol, like that used by
> > Ethernet, the actual capacity of the link is always(*) somewhat less tha
> < said:
>
>
> > The theoretical maximum for 100BaseT-FDX (which is 200Mbps) is 25MB/s
> > (megabytes per second), 100BaseT-TX is 12MB/s [FYI: Mbps->MB/s you divide
> > by 8] I realize my punctuation may be off, but there you are.
>
> Assuming you mean ``100BASE-T (half duplex)'' here... This
> No, it is not. It is 100Mbps upstream and 100Mbps downstream. You cannot get
> 200Mbps in one direction. FDX (Full Duplex) simply means that the RX and TX
> cables are used simultaneous. Due to the small ethernet frame size, it is
> next to impossible to get the full speed for data transmission.
> Ok ... we all know what exactly should be theoretical maximum and all ...
> but that wasn't exactly my question ... I have having weird problems with
> the network performance permanently dropping to below 100 kB/s (while still
> in 100 Mbps/FDX). Is there anybody that could give a plausible exp
On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 02:07:40PM -0500, Garrett Wollman wrote:
> < said:
> Assuming you mean ``100BASE-T (half duplex)'' here... This is not
> quite right. In a CSMA/CD medium access protocol, like that used by
> Ethernet, the actual capacity of the link is always(*) somewhat less than
> 100%;
On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 07:48:35PM +0100, Dieter Rothacker wrote:
> No, it is not. It is 100Mbps upstream and 100Mbps downstream. You cannot get
> 200Mbps in one direction. FDX (Full Duplex) simply means that the RX and TX
> cables are used simultaneous. Due to the small ethernet frame size, it is
< said:
> The theoretical maximum for 100BaseT-FDX (which is 200Mbps) is 25MB/s
> (megabytes per second), 100BaseT-TX is 12MB/s [FYI: Mbps->MB/s you divide
> by 8] I realize my punctuation may be off, but there you are.
Assuming you mean ``100BASE-T (half duplex)'' here... This is not
quite rig
On Thu, 24 Feb 2000 10:21:31 -0700, Chris Wasser wrote:
>> Downloading an 128 MB-file from the network to /dev/null results in speeds
>> like 9.8 MB/s (close to the theoretical maximum for a 100 Mbps network)
>
>The theoretical maximum for 100BaseT-FDX (which is 200Mbps) is 25MB/s
>(megabytes per
Don't forget protocol overhead.
Chris Wasser wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 12:04:38PM +0100, Pascal Hofstee wrote:
> > media: autoselect (100baseTX )
> >
> > Downloading an 128 MB-file from the network to /dev/null results in speeds
> > like 9.8 MB/s (close to the theoretical maximum fo
On Thu, Feb 24, 2000 at 12:04:38PM +0100, Pascal Hofstee wrote:
> media: autoselect (100baseTX )
>
> Downloading an 128 MB-file from the network to /dev/null results in speeds
> like 9.8 MB/s (close to the theoretical maximum for a 100 Mbps network)
The theoretical maximum for 100BaseT-FDX
Hello,
I am experiencing some weird problems with the dc-driver for a specific
ethernet-card ... the Compex Freedomline (10/100 Mbps).
The card perfectly seems to autodetect the mode it should operate on and
seems to indeed be working just fine just after the system has booted up.
--[dmesg]
22 matches
Mail list logo
