Gigabit Ethernet SBus & Gigabit Ethernet Sun 420R/220R

[Nick B.]

One thing to keep in mind, the 1000baseT gbics pull alot more power than the
1000baseSX (don't ask me why, I'm not sure either, but I know they do, and on
the line cards they are supported in there is a limit to how many you can run)
        Nick
On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 10:37:46AM -0400, Dan Sikorski wrote:

> Sridhar Ayengar wrote:
> >
> >I get the same kind of numbers on the same model switch.  Maybe the
> >switch just sucks.  I should check if there's a firmware upgrade
> >available for it.
>
> On an almost-related note, at some point in the past, I had discussed on
> this list (with Sridhar?) the possibility of using a WS-X5410 9 port
> gigabit module with WS-G5483 1000baseT GBICs in a cisco catalyst  5000.  
> Even though cisco documentation says that the copper GBICs will not
> work, they do work just fine.  CatOS sees all ports, and shows the ports
> with the copper GBICS as 1000baseT.
>
> There are a couple of limitations in my setup, however.  Since the
> catalyst 5000 only has a 1.3Gbps backplane, performance between the FDDI
> and 10/100 ethernet portions of the network could be limited.  This is
> not a problem for me since we're talking about my home network with only
> a handful of hosts.  Due to an ASIC limitation, the WS-X5410 cannot use
> jumbo frames, which sucks.  Had i known that, i probably would have
> opted for getting a couple of the 3 port modules, and living with the
> backplane limitation between the two modules, or finding  a 5500 chassis
> to move everything to.
>
>    -Dan Sikorski
> _______________________________________________
> rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue

_______________________________________________
rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue

[Dan Sikorski]

Nick B. wrote:
> One thing to keep in mind, the 1000baseT gbics pull alot more power than the
> 1000baseSX (don't ask me why, I'm not sure either, but I know they do, and on
> the line cards they are supported in there is a limit to how many you can run)
>  
Thanks for the pointer, any idea how i can tell if this is becoming a
problem before it just burns something up?  Also, any idea what it would
burn up?

    -Dan
_______________________________________________
rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue

[Nick B.]

Sorry, all I know is what's in the manual.
        Nick
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 10:17:24AM -0400, Dan Sikorski wrote:

> Nick B. wrote:
> >One thing to keep in mind, the 1000baseT gbics pull alot more power than
> >the
> >1000baseSX (don't ask me why, I'm not sure either, but I know they do, and
> >on
> >the line cards they are supported in there is a limit to how many you can
> >run)
> >  
> Thanks for the pointer, any idea how i can tell if this is becoming a
> problem before it just burns something up?  Also, any idea what it would
> burn up?
>
>    -Dan
> _______________________________________________
> rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue

_______________________________________________
rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue

[Shannon Hendrix]

On Apr 25, 2008, at 00:09 , Sridhar Ayengar wrote:

> Shannon Hendrix wrote:
>> On my gigabit LAN, I seem to max out usually around 20MBytes/sec.
>> That's going from a Mac Pro to a Dell T105.
>> Neither of them is using enough CPU to even show up during a  
>> transfer, so I'm not sure why I can't get better.
>> Of course, my NAS box maxes out at less than that, around 14MBytes/
>> sec, but it has a tiny 200MHz embedded CPU.
>> Seems to me CPU isn't the issue, nor should the bus be an issue  
>> with my Mac and my Dell, both of which have gigE on PCI Express.
>> My switch is an HP 1800 24-port, which is supposed to have 48Gbit/
>> sec of bandwidth.
>
> I get the same kind of numbers on the same model switch.  Maybe the  
> switch just sucks.  I should check if there's a firmware upgrade  
> available for it.

I don't think it is the switch, since it came recommended by some guys  
who work with them a lot and said that, for the money, it is one of  
the best you can get.

The truth is, if you really want a great gigabit switch, they still  
cost well north of $1000.

This one was $450.

I think the NIC in the Dell unit is fine.  Broadcom NetXtreme is not  
the best, but it isn't terrible.

One problem is that I cannot enable jumbo frames in Solaris.  I can't  
figure out how to do it.

Other people report this NIC can do it, so there must be a way unless  
the Solaris driver just can't do it.

I can also look at it this way: before getting the gigabit switch, the  
old 3Com Superstack I had was barely able to do 5MB/sec...






--
Shannon Hendrix
shannon@...
_______________________________________________
rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue

[Jonathan Katz-2]

On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Shannon Hendrix <shannon@...> wrote:
>  One problem is that I cannot enable jumbo frames in Solaris.  I can't
> figure out how to do it.
>
>  Other people report this NIC can do it, so there must be a way unless the
> Solaris driver just can't do it.

http://www.sun.com/products/networking/ethernet/jumbo/index.html
_______________________________________________
rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue

[Shannon Hendrix]

On May 2, 2008, at 16:41 , Jonathan Katz wrote:

> On Fri, May 2, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Shannon Hendrix  
> <shannon@...> wrote:
>> One problem is that I cannot enable jumbo frames in Solaris.  I can't
>> figure out how to do it.
>>
>> Other people report this NIC can do it, so there must be a way  
>> unless the
>> Solaris driver just can't do it.
>
> http://www.sun.com/products/networking/ethernet/jumbo/index.html

Tons of great information, but none of it what I'm looking for, unless  
you had something specific in mind.

That URL references little but Sun hardware that I can see.

I'm looking specifically to find out why it doesn't work on my  
adapter, even though it supports jumbo frames and the driver  
configuration has jumbo support parameters (not all of them do, even  
if the hardware supports it).

In /kernel/dev/bcme.conf

RxJumboDescCnt=128;
MaxJumboFrameSize=9000,9000,9000,...

That should be, according to what I've read, all I need to do.  Bump  
the descriptor count a little and make sure the MTU can be set high.

I don't know if there is something else I need to do or not.

I got the latest driver from last November, and it's supposed to  
support what I'm doing.

Is it possible I need to set MaxJumboFrameSize to something larger  
than 9000?

Another variable somewhere maybe?

The documentation on all of this is scattered pretty badly.  For  
example, it took me a long time to figure out for some hardware that I  
need to make changes in /kernel/drv.

It's worth a visit there if you've never peaked before.

Obviously, study first before playing and make backups... :)

Feel free to slap me with a herring if I'm supposed to be using a tool  
to edit those variables... :)




--
"Where some they sell their dreams for small desires."
_______________________________________________
rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue

[Patrick Giagnocavo 717-201-3366]

Shannon Hendrix wrote:
>
> The documentation on all of this is scattered pretty badly.  For
> example, it took me a long time to figure out for some hardware that I
> need to make changes in /kernel/drv.

Some tips here:

http://prefetch.net/blog/index.php/category/solaris-networking/

read the dladm man page also.

--Patrick
_______________________________________________
rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue

[Shannon Hendrix]

On May 2, 2008, at 22:38 , Patrick Giagnocavo wrote:

> Shannon Hendrix wrote:
>> The documentation on all of this is scattered pretty badly.  For  
>> example, it took me a long time to figure out for some hardware  
>> that I need to make changes in /kernel/drv.
>
> Some tips here:
>
> http://prefetch.net/blog/index.php/category/solaris-networking/
>
> read the dladm man page also.

Nice info.

No joy.

The bcme driver doesn't give any information on frames and the data  
that the Fujitsu in those examples does.

dladm options like --statistics don't work either.

Maybe this is just a really crappy driver, and hopefully Sun will  
write a better one than what Broadcom supplies.

kstat is a cool program BTW.  Lot's of interesting information on the  
other drivers on the system too.

It will be nice when Solaris x86 starts getting better system  
information.  Right now very few systems support things like  
temperature, CPU debugging/counter information, etc.

In the last 2 years, the support level for x86 has really increased  
though, and it seems to be getting more popular.



--
"Where some they sell their dreams for small desires."
_______________________________________________
rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue