Network board 10/100 full duplex

I have an issue with my system (solaris 8 sparc):
If I download a local file from a distant machine the file is going at about 100Mb. If I try to upload that same file then it is going at 10Mb.
I checked the cables etc but could not find anything.
ndd reports correct figures (100Mb and full duplex)
# ndd -get /dev/hme lp_autoneg_cap
1
# ndd -get /dev/hme lp_100fdx_cap
1
# ndd -get /dev/hme lp_100hdx_cap
1
# ndd -get /dev/hme lp_100T4_cap
0
# ndd -get /dev/hme lp_10fdx_cap
1
# ndd -get /dev/hme lp_10hdx_cap
1
Where should I look now?

Thank you for your help
With those parameters set, my bandwith is just worse so I came back to the previous configuration.
I tried hmeconfig (found on the web, a small perl script to display everything) and it showed:
hme0: using RJ-45 at 100 Mbps full-duplex
* RJ-45 Hardware supports: auto-neg, 100-full, 100-half, 10-full, 10-half
* Auto-negotiation is: ON
* Enabled modes: 100-full, 100-half, 10-full, 10-half
* Link Partner supports: auto-neg, 100-full, 100-half, 10-full, 10-half
with default values (nothing in /etc/system) and:
hme0: using RJ-45 at 100 Mbps full-duplex
* RJ-45 Hardware supports: auto-neg, 100-full, 100-half, 10-full, 10-half
* Auto-negotiation is: OFF
* Enabled modes: 100-full
* Link Partner supports: UNKNOWN - interface not in auto-negotiation mode
with the following in /etc/system:
set hme:hme_adv_autoneg_cap=0
set hme:hme_adv_100T4_cap=0
set hme:hme_adv_100fdx_cap=1
set hme:hme_adv_100hdx_cap=0
set hme:hme_adv_10fdx_cap=0
set hme:hme_adv_10hdx_cap=0
This sounds normal except that the second one is just slower for ftp exchanges.
I cannot understand this.

Similar Messages

  • Hard code spwr network card for 100-full

    How can I hard code a spwr network card for 100-full duplex?
    thanks,
    Clark

    The following lines added to /etc/system sets a hme network card to 100 full duplex,
    set hme:hme_adv_autoneg_cap=0
    set hme:hme_adv_100T4_cap=0
    set hme:hme_adv_100fdx_cap=1
    set hme:hme_adv_100hdx_cap=0
    set hme:hme_adv_10fdx_cap=0
    set hme:hme_adv_10hdx_cap=0

  • Trying to set network interface at 100/full on Solaris 11

    Hi all,
    I hope someone can help me.
    I've built two boxes running Solaris 11 in my lab. Connected to a hub, all seemed well.
    Now, I've connected them to the network here and I'm having the following issue, The machines should be connecting to the network at 100Mbps/full. Instead, it seems they are trying to connect at 10Mbps/full, which is causing a problem.
    When I check the speed on the NIC (interface=net2), speed is set to 10Mb :
         dladm show-linkprop net2
    Returns speed=10.
    PROPERTY     PERM     VALUE
    speed               r-          10
    As you can see from the above, permission is set to read only.
    When I try to set the link speed as follow :
         dladm set-linkprop -p speed=100 net2
    I get the following error
         'Cannot set link property speed on net2 - operation not supported.'
    Which I assume is because of the read-only property/
    I have also tried setting the property old-style with ndd :
         /usr/sbin/ndd -set /dev/<device-name> adv_100fdx_cap 1
    And get 'Operation not supported'.
    And finally, I've entered the settings in /etc/system itself (and rebooted) :
        set net2:adv_100fdx_cap=1
    All to no avail.
    Note the following blog post I've found here indicating someone else had issues with mode/speed in Solaris 11 (unfortunately I'm still stumped!) :
    http://blog.thilelli.net/post/2011/02/19/Solaris-11-Express%3A-Problem-6
    My networks man is adamant that the network settings are correct, i.e. the network is set to 100Mbps, and looking at his switch settings he seems to be correct.
    Does anyone have any ideas as to where I can go from here? Much appreciated....

    Despite what your site's network staff have said, this is likely to be their issue.
    If you are connecting to a managed switch, that entire peripheral may have specific settings on some or all of its ports.
    I suggest you let that switch do whatever it expects to do and remove all customizations to your NIC's configuration.   Let it auto-negotiate.
    You should also ignore that link you have in your initial post.   The ERI network interface that is described there was a very specific network chipset and used on a very small specific number of Sun SPARC boxes.  It was known to have issues with proper negotiation (it would usually work but sometimes just get mucked up).
    See this Symantec link http://www.symantec.com/business/support/index?page=content&id=TECH37566
    and the following two Oracle notes:
    (PDF) http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19455-01/806-5579-10/806-5579-10.pdf
    http://docs.oracle.com/cd/E19253-01/816-4554/fwawf/index.html

  • Full duplex Nic settings

    Hello,
    I use the bootcd.iso, to make an image from a brandnew pc and put it on a
    special ZEN server. It works, but it is ****ing slow. We use cisco
    switches and have a 100 full duplex network speed in our workstation
    settings. So NO autosensing! How (and in which config file) can I change
    the settings in the bootcd.iso image so I have a 100 full duplex
    connection instead of auto sensing?
    Regards
    Hans Kat
    ICT cordinator
    Dura Vermeer infrastructuur

    Hi Hans,
    > I use the bootcd.iso, to make an image from a brandnew pc and put it on a
    > special ZEN server. It works, but it is ****ing slow. We use cisco
    > switches and have a 100 full duplex network speed in our workstation
    > settings. So NO autosensing! How (and in which config file) can I change
    > the settings in the bootcd.iso image so I have a 100 full duplex
    > connection instead of auto sensing?
    I included 'mii-tool' in our images. It's available on a lot of Linux
    systems and can be used to view and adjust the settings of the NIC.
    Just run 'mii-tool' to view the settings or run
    'mii-tool -F 100baseTx-FD'
    to set it to 100 Mb Full Duplex.
    HTH.
    Best regards,
    Ricardo

  • Is PCI-6025E full duplexing ?

    Do E series DAQ boards work in full-duplex mode ? Especially PCI-6025E .

    I believe I may have sent you an e-mail about this. However, I would be glad to post about it here as well.
    Full-duplexing is not a term we commonly associate with our DAQ boards. It is usually used in reference to serial-type communication that can go both ways at the same time (such as a modem). The best answer I can give on this is that the 6025E you asked about has 3 additional DIO ports (PA, PB, PC) which can operate in Bi-Directional Mode. This allows them to function as both inputs and outputs. The 6025E User's Manual is the best place to find more information about this.
    Ross C
    National Instruments

  • 100TX Full Duplex not working forced to 100/half - fixed

    I dont know if everybody figured this out. but I found this info on an old board and it worked for me on my qaud Intel running SL server.
    First check your Network Utility to see which network interface is active but problamatic. (eg. en0, en1, en2).
    Open terminal and enter command line:
    sudo ifconfig en0 media 100baseTX mediaopt hw-loopback
    Depending on your active network interface you may have to change the "en0" to "en1"......
    My Mac immediately began communicating at 100/Full.
    However, If you shut the machine down you will have to do this again after each reboot.

    Yalp wrote:
    The only possibility that I can see is that it is a software problem on these Macs.
    There is always a certain level of slack engineering into all these devices. When you start updating one part of a network, you risk exceeding the slack. It is always possible that the problem is with the router hardware or cabling. Certainly, the problem would be with 10.6.5 too. But if you jump to one conclusion or the other without troubleshooting you risk waiting forever for a fix that will never come.
    So, what you have to do is connect these Macs to some other router/hub running 100BT/Full (with settings as close to default as possible) with cables that you know are rated at that speed. If that fails, submit a bug report to Apple. If it works, take your router/hub and put it in the network cabinet and connect it to the Mac Pro with the existing cable. If that fails, sue whomever installed the cable and redo it (network people sometimes try to save money with cable). If that works, look at the existing router/hub and see if it has any bugs or firmware updates available. At this point, you could submit a bug to Apple with precise details about your router/hub and also submit one to the manufacturer of the router/hub. Apple will either fix the problem or contact the router/hub manufacturer and get a fix. Once you know precisely what connection is causing the problem, there may be other ways to address it either on the router/hub side or on the Mac side.

  • Full duplex with a 100 FX connection

    Hello,
    I have a WS-2960-24TC-L running with c2960-lanbase-mz.122-40.SE.bin with two GLC-GE-100FX= in it.
    I am trying to link this switch to a 3750 with a GLC-GE-100FX= and a WS-2955C-12.
    The 2960 always auto negotiate to 100 half with both switches. In the 3750 I can force the port to Full duplex but the DUPLEX command in not ava lable on gig 0/1-2.
    I would be nice to have a 100 Full link between the switches.
    Can you help me ?

    Current GigE is full-duplex only.
    You might try using a 10/100 port (as a trunk port if necessary).
    You can also try another cable, preferably a commercially made cable in good condition. Poorly terminated hand-made cables, or cables that have been kinked, stretched, crushed {etc} can cause the ports to downshift.
    Good Luck
    Scott

  • Mac Pro 10.6.5 100baseTX Full Duplex Not Working

    Hi Guys,
    I am having some trouble with the Mac Pros that I support in my office (Early 2009 Model). Our network uses 100baseTX Full Duplex on all of our connections in a mixed PC/Mac environment. This was working perfectly fine until we updated our Mac Pros to 10.6.5 (Went straight from 10.5.6 to 10.6.5).
    Every Mac Pro now has itself set to automatically detect the speed, and they keep setting themselves to 100/Half. If I go in and manually adjust it, setting it to 100/Full, I lose all connectivity to the ethernet (it doesn't even recognize that a cable is plugged in). This is causing a lot of troubles for our Mac users trying to access files on our shared drives. It is taking them about 5 minutes to download a 30MB file, rather than the 3 seconds it should.
    I tried booting to our portable 10.5.6 drive and 100/Full works just fine. Our PowerMacs on 10.4.11 also work fine on 100/full. I tried using Cocktail and Sudo to force the change, but again the ethernet drops out. The problem persists through all user accounts on all the effected Macs. I have tried a fresh install of 10.6 and the problem persists. If I downgrade back to 10.5 the problem is gone. I know it is not an issue with the network because 2000 other machines are working just fine, and the affected ones work fine when downgraded.
    I just spent a good hour on the phone with AppleCare, but after insisting it was a problem with our network for the first 45 minutes, they came to the conclusion that they simply could not help me. According to them, if I want networking help, I need to convince my company to spend $2,800 on their enterprise support, and even then they don't know if they will be able to help me. So, it looks like I am on my own here.
    Anyone have any thoughts on what is going on or how to fix it?

    Yalp wrote:
    The only possibility that I can see is that it is a software problem on these Macs.
    There is always a certain level of slack engineering into all these devices. When you start updating one part of a network, you risk exceeding the slack. It is always possible that the problem is with the router hardware or cabling. Certainly, the problem would be with 10.6.5 too. But if you jump to one conclusion or the other without troubleshooting you risk waiting forever for a fix that will never come.
    So, what you have to do is connect these Macs to some other router/hub running 100BT/Full (with settings as close to default as possible) with cables that you know are rated at that speed. If that fails, submit a bug report to Apple. If it works, take your router/hub and put it in the network cabinet and connect it to the Mac Pro with the existing cable. If that fails, sue whomever installed the cable and redo it (network people sometimes try to save money with cable). If that works, look at the existing router/hub and see if it has any bugs or firmware updates available. At this point, you could submit a bug to Apple with precise details about your router/hub and also submit one to the manufacturer of the router/hub. Apple will either fix the problem or contact the router/hub manufacturer and get a fix. Once you know precisely what connection is causing the problem, there may be other ways to address it either on the router/hub side or on the Mac side.

  • How do I set ethernet speed to 100 Full?

    Right now we connect at 100 half duplex. I need to change our Mac lab to 100 full but I can't find how to do it. We are running Imac G5's with Tiger. Please help. Thanks in advance

    System Preferences>Network>Show:>Ethernet>Ethernet Tab>Configure=Manually, Speed=100, Duplex=Full... Apply.

  • Auto-nego or 100-Full

    We have a combination of Dell and Sun servers
    at my site and a fierce debate is ongoing as to whether all server switch ports should be set at auto or 100/full. My own preference is auto both ends and fix if that doesn't work.
    Does anyone else have an opinon about what's "best" or why they have chosen one method over another.

    I realize that you've already made up your mind but let me give you a practical prespective. I manage a network of roughly 17,000 nodes of which roughtly 2000 of them are in a data center (i.e. servers) and the rest are client devices such as desktops, some servers, and various medical equipment. The desktop environment is exclusively auto-negotiated while the server environment was hard-coded on both ends to 100/FULL with some exceptions. We've had more trouble worrying about duplex/speed settings on the 2000 machines while the auto-negotiated client networks have had almost unheard of problems due to negotiation. The problem isn't whether or not setting it one way or another is bad. Like others said, so long as both ends are the same then you generally shouldn't have any problem. The problem stems from people moving devices around or reconfiguring their devices and forgetting to set the port to 100/FULL. On a 2000 node data center environment this happens quite frequenty. The problem is procedural in nature and not really technical. We've recently switch to auto-negotiated across the entire network and we're already reaping the rewards. SysAdmin basically cut one process (i.e. hard-coding the ports) completely out of their procedures which also saved a lot of time in troubleshooting "network problems" if you catch my drift.
    So I'm only saying this to advise you to concentrate on process/procedures for how things get provisioned going forward in the DataCenter as this will be the biggest headache for you and having a good process in place will help you.

  • Ettus USRP B200 full duplex at 16 or 32 MSPS?

    I am testing the B200 with two different PCs, both running Ubuntu 14.04 LTS.
    One is a 4 year old Core i7 PC with an Intel MB and a NEC Corporation uPD720200 USB 3.0 controller.
    The other is a 1 year old Asus G750 laptop with an Intel 8 Series/C220 USB 3.0 controller. 
    Both machines can handle sustained (a few hours) 350+ MB/second transfers from a Point Grey USB 3.0 camera over a 3 meter cable with zero USB 3.0 errors reported by Point Grey's software. Note this is one direction of data flow over USB 3.0, not full duplex. The PC reached 356 MB/second. The laptop reached 369 MB/second. Both error free over periods of about 1 hour. 
    The B200 can reliably TX and RX (full duplex) at a common data rate of 4 MSPS on both machines. 
    8 MSPS full duplex is intermittently OK (occasional buffer overruns on both machines). Note: (8 MSPS) * (2 bytes/sample) * 2 (RX + TX) * 2 (I + Q) = 64 MB/second... fairly low for what USB 3.0 is capable of.
    16 and 32 MSPS full duplex is never reliable (all runs result in buffer overruns and missing RX or TX data).
    Command I'm using (set for 8 MSPS):
    nice -20 ./txrx_loopback_to_file --file samples.dat --type float
    --nsamps 50000000 --tx-rate 8000000 --rx-rate 8000000 --tx-freq
    915000000.000000 --rx-freq 916000000.000000 --tx-gain 0.000000
    --rx-gain 0.000000 --wave-type RAMP --wave-freq 10000.000000
    Note this is 1 channel TX + 1 channel RX full duplex. Wire format is "sc16" (16 bits per sample over the bus I believe). Data format is "fc32" (32 bit float). I've tried both the stable and unstable UHD drivers. 
    I also observed that a moderate bend of the USB 3.0 cable will noticeably reduce reliability. Nothing too severe as to permanently deform or damage the cable. 
    I suspect RFI is affecting the USB 3.0 signals. 
    *** Questions ***
    Any suggestions on how to achieve reliable 16 or 32 MSPS full duplex transfers? Hopefully reliable as in sustained full-duplex TX and RX or an average of 15 minutes between data transfer errors. 
    Has anyone placed their USRP B200 or B210 in a metal enclosure? Was reliabliity affected?
    Has anyone tested their B200 / B210 with different USB host controllers and found a controller that is ideal for full-duplex TX+RX at the 16 or 32 MSPS rates? 
    Do full duplex TX+RX configurations create a significantly greater I/O challenge over USB versus TX-only or RX-only?
    Or is the USRP B200 / B210 simply not the best hardware for doing sustained 16 or 32 MSPS full duplex TX and RX? Better to use a PCI Express interface SDR?

    John,
    Thank you for your time and help.
    Yes I have posted to the USRP-users mailing list along with more detailed test results. I've also corresponded with Matt Ettus.
    Thank you for the link to benchmarks. I later found that. I have stopped using the B200 with the computer with the NEC controller although it did give similar results versus the laptop with the 8 Series/C220. I am now just testing with the Asus Laptop with the 8 Series/C220 controller.
    I do appreciate that the PCIe or 10-gigabit based SDRs are more reliable. Matt told me this too. I would expect this based on the prices. I am more concerned that full duplex with the B200 appears almost useless. Maybe my 8 Series/C220 controller has electrical or RFI problems? Maybe my B200 is defective?
    I am concerned with the $5000 cost for a PCIe or 10-gigabit Ethernet solution when a PCIe x4 capable FPGA now only cost $100 or $200 more than the FPGA and Cypress FX3 that the B200 uses.
    I'm tempted to instead spend $5K to roll my own PCIe MIMO SDR for $750 to $1000 per board versus spending $5000 for one X300, RF daugtherboard and external PCIe kit. And I can customize it to my needs better. Per Vices did exactly this and offered a $750 (later revised to $2500) PCIe SDR board with 100 MHz simultaneous TX and RX bandwidth.
    Jason

  • 100/full or auto

    Hi, what recommendation would folks give as to what workstations (win2k) and switch (6513) settings should be. We're debating between 100/full on both sides vs. auto on both sides. Or between these two settings doesn't it really matter.

    I'll throw 2 cents in here also on what we do . For any servers it's probably best to hardcode the ports. For all user clients we leave as auto unless they are having a specific problem because on a network of any size haveing to hardcode all user ports becomes unmanagable . Also if one person say moves and another user moves in and his is set as auto and you have the port hardcoded then you have duplex mismatches. Auto works pretty well nowadays and we have very few problems with it . Below is a blurb out of Cisco's best practices.
    Recommendation
    Whether to configure auto-negotiation on 10/100 links or to hard code speed and duplex ultimately depends on the type of link partner or end device you have connected to a Catalyst switch port. Auto-negotiation between end devices and Catalyst switches generally works well, and Catalyst switches are compliant with the IEEE 802.3u specification. Problems may result, however, when NIC or vendor switches do not conform exactly. Hardware incompatibility and other issues may also exist as a result of vendor-specific advanced features, such as auto-polarity or cabling integrity, that are not described in the IEEE 802.3u specification for 10/100 Mbps auto-negotiation. An example is given in the following field notice:
    It is worth anticipating that there will be some situations that require host, port speed, and duplex to be set. In general, follow these basic troubleshooting steps:
    Make sure that either auto-negotiation is configured on both sides of the link or hard coding is configured on both sides.
    Check the CatOS release notes for common caveats.
    Verify the version of NIC driver or operating system you are running, as the latest driver or patch is often required.
    As a rule, try using auto-negotiation first for any type of link partner. There are obvious benefits to configuring auto-negotiation for transient devices like laptops. Auto-negotiation should also work well with non-transient devices like servers and fixed workstations or from switch-to-switch and switch-to-router. For some of the reasons mentioned above, however, negotiation issues may arise. In these cases, follow the basic troubleshooting steps outlined in the TAC links provided.

  • B200M3 and Vsphere 5.1 - Unable to set NIC speed to 10gb full duplex

    Hi,
    My first post here!
    I got 4 B200M3 blades with VIC 1240 and 1280. I have installed vSphere 5.1 on them. The blades are configed with a number of NIC's.
    The NIC's get a speed of 20gb full duplex(set on auto negotiation) and i would like to set them to 10gb full duplex. When i try to change it in vSphere i get an error message
    "Call "HostNetworkSystem.UpdatePhysicalNicLinkSpeed" for object "networkSystem-1264" on vCenter Server "xxxxxxxxxxxxxx" failed.
    Operation failed, diagnostics report: Forcing 1000Mbps or faster may not be supported on this network device, please use auto-negotiation instead"
    After some searching it looks like you sometimes have to upgrade vSphere with new drivers to get these things to work?
    Anyone got any ideas that can help me?
    // Fredrik

    Hi Fredrik,
    A few quick questions:
    1) What is the driver type and the version on the vnics? here is the HCL for the required driver versions:
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/unified_computing/ucs/interoperability/matrix/r_hcl_B_rel2.04.pdf
    2) Did you install 5.1 direct or did you upgrade from 5.0? For this blade you need to use the CISCO OEM Custom ESXi image. We still do not have the 5.1 image published, however the 5.0 and 5.0 U1 are avaiable for use. Here is the download location:
    https://my.vmware.com/group/vmware/details?downloadGroup=CISCO-ESXI-5.0.0-U1-28AUG2012&productId=229
    Thanks!
    ./Abhinav

  • 3Com elxl in Solaris 10: Force full duplex?

    After being up for a few hours, my Solaris 10 (11/06 release, patched up to date), appears to virtually stop functioning network-wise; throughput goes to single-digits/second. I'm guessing this is a duplex mis-match, but editing /kernel/drv/elxl.conf to force full-duplex kills the NIC altogether, generating a stream of errors.
    Searching this forum shows discussions of stuff like this going back to Solaris 8, but most threads are inconclusive.
    Anyone have a final conclusion?

    But when I want
    a static ip by putting the ip in hostname.bcme0 it
    gives me this in bootup(pasted only the interesting
    bits):As the filename hostname.bcme0 already suggests you don't enter an IP adress there but a hostname. The IP adres is then picked up by checking the hostname against /etc/inet/hosts.
    You might want to check out http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/816-4554/816-4554#hic for more information on this matter.

  • What is the command to get network interface index, speed and duplex?

    I need the following info
    interface index
    interface speed
    interface duplex
    interface negotiation
    IPv4 dhcp server
    IPv6 dhcp server
    can any one let me know the command to get the above info?

    Hi,
    on Solaris 10 you can use the dladm command. Have a look at the man page, e.g.:
    dladm show-dev
    e1000g0 link: up speed: 100 Mbps duplex: full
    e1000g1 link: down speed: 0 Mbps duplex: half
    e1000g2 link: unknown speed: 0 Mbps duplex: unknown
    e1000g3 link: unknown speed: 0 Mbps duplex: unknown
    dladm show-link
    e1000g0 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g0
    e1000g1 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g1
    e1000g2 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g2
    e1000g3 type: non-vlan mtu: 1500 device: e1000g3
    Also have a look at ifconfig, e.g. ifconfig -a
    Andreas

Maybe you are looking for