[120038] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Linux shaping packet loss
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brielle Bruns)
Tue Dec 8 11:39:36 2009
Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2009 09:38:54 -0700
From: Brielle Bruns <bruns@2mbit.com>
To: nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <9EC109B1-66BD-460B-AF86-7A8EB753496B@hopcount.ca>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
On 12/8/09 8:13 AM, Joe Abley wrote:
> I've also heard people say that whatever you think about autoneg in
> Fast Ethernet, on Gigabit and 10GE interfaces it's pretty much never
> the right idea to turn autoneg off.
From my own experience, turning off auto negotiate can lead to unusual
behavior later on that may cause a bit of grief. Our SAN (LHN NSM260)
refused flat out to do 802.3ad - giving us duplex errors. Took us
around an hour of diagnosing - first we thought it was the switch, then
we thought it was the cables we used, etc. Finally it dawned on me that
my partner is notorious for hard coding ports on our own equipment.
Low and behold, after her swearing up and down that there's no way its
that, we set both ends to auto negotiate and boom, bonding came up happy
as a clam.
Only one port on our entire setup that is hard coded - 10BaseT-FD - and
thats only because the darn thing refuses to auto negotiate to full
duplex for 10BaseT links. I'm almost positive that a year or two down
the line, we're going to forget that is there when we change the link to
100BaseT.
--
Brielle Bruns
The Summit Open Source Development Group
http://www.sosdg.org / http://www.ahbl.org
