Networking [was Re: NFS Question]

[Rich Payne]

On Thu, 29 Aug 2002 pll at lanminds.com wrote:

> 
> In a message dated: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 16:19:21 EDT
> "Derek D. Martin" said:
> 
> >We were using (actual genuine bonifide) Tulip chips with Cisco
> >switches; this combination of hardware is known to have issues with
> >autonegotiation, according to some post I found by Donald Becker
> >somewhere on some website.  :)
> 
> Actually, I've come to the conclusion that the combination of any NIC 
> and auto-neg with Cisco gear is a recipe for disaster.
> 
> I actually had a Cisco rep tell me *today* that:
> 
> 	"There has been nothing in the last 2 years related to
> 	 auto-negotion problems where we've been able to identify
> 	 it as a problem specific to Cisco.  It has always
> 	 been a problem with the NIC driver!"
> 
> Yet I remember quite clearly at MCL, the networking guys getting an 
> IOS bug report telling them to upgrade to version 11.mumble of IOS to 
> eliminate the auto-neg problem with Intel EEPro100 NICs.
> 
> The same guy also told me that no matter what NIC you use, if you 
> hard-set one side and leave the other side auto-neg, you will always 
> end up getting an auto-neg conflict on the duplex side.  He blames 
> the spec, which it might be, since it is a crappy spec.  Yet I've 
> never seen this with *any* other vendor combination; Bay/Nortel, 
> 3Com, Allied Telesyn, etc.

I'll second that. While on the whole Cisco's stuff is good...they are 
miserable at the auto-neg side. Now when adding a client I need to know 
which make of network card is inside to set the switch up properly. I've 
found even the ones that 'work' out of the box turn out to have terrible 
performance....

-rdp

-- 
Rich Payne
http://talisman.mv.com