Subject: Re: [netatalk-admins] (tulip driver notice)
From: Jeff Wiegley (jeff@w3-design.com)
Date: Tue Nov 25 1997 - 15:51:18 EST
Nicolai Langfeldt wrote:
>
> Jeff Wiegley <jeff@w3-design.com> tastet:
> > The company I worked with went with an Intel/Linux platform for all
> > our file sharing plans and we haven't looked back. We've been running
> > problem free for 14 days now. Haven't had to reboot the machine or
> > restart the file sharing servers netatalk or samba except to add
> > printers.
> ...
> > Don't bet on the DEC tulip cards. They are *great* cards and they
> > seem to work perfectly *except* with netatalk. Even Donald Beckers
> > newest tulip drivers do not seem to work correctly with netatalk
> ...
>
> This is ...interesting.
>
> I'm running netatalk on a machine with a 21140 card at 10Mbps. Works
> great. Stock 2.0.31 kernel at the moment (_no_ patches).
>
> Is it at 100Mbps it breaks down?
>
> Another interesting thing, People using boomerang (3com 10/100) cards
> should be cautious about using the new 'unified' 3com driver.
>
> If my box breaks at 100Mbps I'm going to try Intel Etherexpress Pro.
> It appears it has the potential to be faster than tulips due to
> alignment flexibility (apparently the typical packet payload start
> can be aligned to 4byte boundrary, instead of the header which the
> tulip dictates)
>
> Nicolai
No, mine breaks at 10Mbps we don't have any 100Mbps capable routers
around here :-(
Well, As I said, it doesn't really "break" like the 3Com cards do.
The network still seems to run perfectly, no errors fast response.
its just that netatalk isn't able to see any other appletalk devices
except those registered by the netatalk server itself. (nbplkup only
shows the netatalk server objects and nothing else)
but unix networking and samba run fine.
- Jeff
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Sat Dec 18 1999 - 16:28:17 EST