On Tue, Aug 10, 2004 at 05:37:28PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> So, is there a bug in the em device driver that doesn't exist on the fxp0
> devices?
I have a bundle of machines with em cards that had problems talking
to dumb 10Mbps switches. They work fine with a different 10/100
dumb switch.
'k, did someone fix something with the em driver? :( Figuring it couldn't
hurt to try auto-neg once more, and so far, 0 Ierrs :( So either someone
fixed the em problem, or the em problem was transient ... but it was
originally the default (autoselect), and I only moved it to a hard coded
*aft
[ ...crossposting between stable and freebsd-net trimmed... ]
On Aug 10, 2004, at 4:37 PM, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I've tried in bth half and full duplex mode .. full duplex, Ierrs
climbs, half-duplex, Collisions climb ...
You should expect to see some collisions (1% or so) when working in
half-d
In reply to "Marc G. Fournier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> :
>
> I have 5 servers sitting on a Linksys 10/100 switch ... 4 of the 5 are
> running fxp0 ethernet, while the 5th is running em ... and the 5th
> performs atrociously:
>
> neptune# netstat -ni | head
> NameMtu Network Address
At 04:37 PM 10/08/2004, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
I have 5 servers sitting on a Linksys 10/100 switch ... 4 of the 5 are
running fxp0 ethernet, while the 5th is running em ... and the 5th
performs atrociously:
neptune# netstat -ni | head
NameMtu Network Address Ipkts Ierrs
I have 5 servers sitting on a Linksys 10/100 switch ... 4 of the 5 are
running fxp0 ethernet, while the 5th is running em ... and the 5th
performs atrociously:
neptune# netstat -ni | head
NameMtu Network Address Ipkts IerrsOpkts Oerrs Coll
em01500 00:07:e9:05:
