Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[janvapan]

What ethernet cards I should use for Linux 2.4?.
I am looking for a NIC based on stability and performance.
In short, Intel PRO/100 S Desktop Adapter(e100 driver) or
3Com 10/100 3C905C-TX-M(3c59x driver) ?

thank you,

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Justin Piszcz]

I'd reccomend a 3COM, as they come with a lifetime warranty and have always
been good for me.
Not sure about Intels.
I have a 3com 905b, the current model is a 3com 905C-TX like you mentioned.

janvapan wrote:

> What ethernet cards I should use for Linux 2.4?.
> I am looking for a NIC based on stability and performance.
> In short, Intel PRO/100 S Desktop Adapter(e100 driver) or
> 3Com 10/100 3C905C-TX-M(3c59x driver) ?
>
> thank you,
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Justin Piszcz]

Interesting, I get 11.6MB/s peaks with multiple 100mbits.
3COM's have been great here.
I have 4-5 100mbit 3COM NICS (905bs) (PCI).
And about 10-20 10mbits (ISA+PCI).
All have worked great!
Usually when people have problems with 10/100mbit, they have a half duplex hub or
something lol.

As far as speed is concerned:
Half Duplex hub = Worst
Full Duplex hub = Better
100mbit full duplex switch = best

Mike Ricketts wrote:

> Interesting - I'd say definitely *NOT* the 3com.  I've had a lot of bad
> experience with all sorts of 3com cards when trying to use them at
> 100MBit.  At 10, they are fine, but shove them up to 100 and anything can
> and sometimes does happen.  I have a number of intel cards and have never
> had any problem at all with any of them.
>
> On Sun, 3 Mar 2002, Justin Piszcz wrote:
>
> > I'd reccomend a 3COM, as they come with a lifetime warranty and have always
> > been good for me.
> > Not sure about Intels.
> > I have a 3com 905b, the current model is a 3com 905C-TX like you mentioned.
> >
> > janvapan wrote:
> >
> > > What ethernet cards I should use for Linux 2.4?.
> > > I am looking for a NIC based on stability and performance.
> > > In short, Intel PRO/100 S Desktop Adapter(e100 driver) or
> > > 3Com 10/100 3C905C-TX-M(3c59x driver) ?
> > >
> > > thank you,
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > > Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> > More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> > Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> >
>
> --
> Mike Ricketts <mike@earth.li>                      http://www.earth.li/~mike/
>
> You work very hard.  Don't try to think as well.

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[J Sloan]

In my humble experience with some hundreds
of different Linux servers, the 3c905 seems the
most trouble-free, and performs well.

The Intel adapter has potential driver issues,
although they seem to be getting resolved.

The e100 driver has the disadvantage of being
unable to work with the mii-tool commands,
but seems to work well otherwise - as long as
you don't mind trying to puzzle out whether
the card is conected at 10 or 100, full or half.

The eepro100 driver works with mii-tool, but
many have reported issues with the card dying
under heavy use and needing to be reset. Many
are using the eepro100 without problems - but
the bottom line is that nobody is seeing these
problems with the 3com cards.

YMMV of course -

Joe
 

janvapan wrote:

>What ethernet cards I should use for Linux 2.4?.
>I am looking for a NIC based on stability and performance.
>In short, Intel PRO/100 S Desktop Adapter(e100 driver) or
>3Com 10/100 3C905C-TX-M(3c59x driver) ?
>

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Bernd Eckenfels]

In article <3C8231BA.AD47EA9C@starband.net> you wrote:
> I'd reccomend a 3COM, as they come with a lifetime warranty and have always
> been good for me.

Does lifetime warranty mean you have warranty on them as long as they are
alife?

Greetings
Bernd

RE: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[LA Walsh @ tlinx.org]

Any recommendations for the most  Linux-friendly/best performance,
2-ethernet port cards?  Is there a website one could go to find Linux
Compatible and Linux-ease-of-use hardware and software products?  Comparisons?
Etc?

TIA,
Linda


-----Original Message-----
From: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org]On Behalf Of J Sloan
Sent: Sunday, March 03, 2002 9:15 AM
To: janvapan
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

In my humble experience with some hundreds
of different Linux servers, the 3c905 seems the
most trouble-free, and performs well.

The Intel adapter has potential driver issues,
although they seem to be getting resolved.

The e100 driver has the disadvantage of being
unable to work with the mii-tool commands,
but seems to work well otherwise - as long as
you don't mind trying to puzzle out whether
the card is conected at 10 or 100, full or half.

The eepro100 driver works with mii-tool, but
many have reported issues with the card dying
under heavy use and needing to be reset. Many
are using the eepro100 without problems - but
the bottom line is that nobody is seeing these
problems with the 3com cards.

YMMV of course -

Joe


janvapan wrote:

>What ethernet cards I should use for Linux 2.4?.
>I am looking for a NIC based on stability and performance.
>In short, Intel PRO/100 S Desktop Adapter(e100 driver) or
>3Com 10/100 3C905C-TX-M(3c59x driver) ?
>


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Hans-Christian Armingeon]

Am Sonntag, 3. März 2002 15:22 schrieb Justin Piszcz:
> I'd reccomend a 3COM, as they come with a lifetime warranty and have always
> been good for me.
> Not sure about Intels.
> I have a 3com 905b, the current model is a 3com 905C-TX like you mentioned.
Which of those cards supports calculating ethernet checksums in hardware?

Thanks in advance,

Johnny

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Hans-Christian Armingeon]

Am Sonntag, 3. März 2002 15:22 schrieb Justin Piszcz:
> I'd reccomend a 3COM, as they come with a lifetime warranty and have always
every major brand nic has lifetime warranty
> been good for me.
> Not sure about Intels.
> I have a 3com 905b, the current model is a 3com 905C-TX like you mentioned.
>

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[J Sloan]

LA Walsh @ tlinx.org wrote:

>Any recommendations for the most  Linux-friendly/best performance,
>2-ethernet port cards?  Is there a website one could go to find Linux
>Compatible and Linux-ease-of-use hardware and software products?  Comparisons?
>
Hmm, the only multiport cards I've used are
some tlans and some intel pro 100s -

The tlans are no good for serious use, at least
in my experience - I've been replacing them
as replacements are available.

The dual intel 10/100s I've used work fine,
they are simply detected as 2 intel ethernet
devices.

Joe

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[rddunlap]

On Sun, 3 Mar 2002, Hans-Christian Armingeon wrote:

| Am Sonntag, 3. März 2002 15:22 schrieb Justin Piszcz:
| > I'd reccomend a 3COM, as they come with a lifetime warranty and have always
| > been good for me.
| > Not sure about Intels.
| > I have a 3com 905b, the current model is a 3com 905C-TX like you mentioned.
| Which of those cards supports calculating ethernet checksums in hardware?

All of them do ethernet checksums^W CRCs in hardware.

Did you mean something like, "which ones do IP and/or TCP
checksums (offloads) in hardware?"

-- 
~Randy

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Mike Fedyk]

On Sun, Mar 03, 2002 at 11:25:12AM -0500, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> Full Duplex hub = Better

= switch ! hub

> 100mbit full duplex switch = best
>

Yep.

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Dan Maas]

> I have a 3com 905b, the current model is a 3com 905C-TX
> like you mentioned. Which of those cards supports calculating
> ethernet checksums in hardware?

Based on my reading of 3c59x.c, 3c905B and 3c905C cards - but not the
original 3c905 - will do TCP checksums in hardware (and thus enable
zero-copy data transfer).

Regards,
Dan

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Vojtech Pavlik]

On Sun, Mar 03, 2002 at 09:15:10PM -0800, Mike Fedyk wrote:

> On Sun, Mar 03, 2002 at 11:25:12AM -0500, Justin Piszcz wrote:
> > Full Duplex hub = Better
> 
> = switch ! hub

Well, most of those have just one packet sized buffer, so they are hubs
performancewise, while they're switches by technology ...

-- 
Vojtech Pavlik
SuSE Labs

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Ken Brownfield]

On Sun, Mar 03, 2002 at 09:15:05AM -0800, J Sloan wrote:
| In my humble experience with some hundreds
| of different Linux servers, the 3c905 seems the
| most trouble-free, and performs well.

Ah, I bet you didn't live through the truly atrocious 3Com drivers of
the past. ;)  The new 3Com stuff seems passable for desktops, but having
been bitten dozens of times, I'm about 4^4^4^4 times shy.

| The Intel adapter has potential driver issues,
| although they seem to be getting resolved.

Haven't had any issues at all with eepro100 or e100 under production
load for years.  Since Tulip went out of the mainstream (poor Digital)
the EtherExpress has been the most stable everywhere I've been.  I've
written too many scripts for 3Com boxes that grep dmesg for "fatal"
errors and unload/reload the 3com module.

| The e100 driver has the disadvantage of being
| unable to work with the mii-tool commands,

Yes, and the fact that it "can't" be compiled-in.

| but seems to work well otherwise - as long as
| you don't mind trying to puzzle out whether
| the card is conected at 10 or 100, full or half.

That's all logged (dmesg, etc), if not distinctly queryable.  Don't the
iANS tools allow this functionality, and more?

| The eepro100 driver works with mii-tool, but
| many have reported issues with the card dying
| under heavy use and needing to be reset. Many
| are using the eepro100 without problems - but
| the bottom line is that nobody is seeing these
| problems with the 3com cards.

Uhm, "nobody" is certainly not the proper word in this context.  We've
pulled many 3Com cards because of issues, including ARP deafness,
overruns, hangs, etc.  I have fully-saturated IDS systems running
eepro100 and e100 without issue, so heavy use may be necessary but is
not sufficient.

Oh, and six years of production on hundreds of EtherExpress NICs with
zero (0) issues.  Obviously, not everyone sees every bug, but the
preponderance of evidence I've seen in production environments puts the
EE way ahead of 3Com.  3Com for Windows desktops works just fine.

I'd like to try existing Tulip hardware though for another option.
Though 8139too seems to work well.

-- 
Ken.
brownfld@irridia.com

| 
| YMMV of course -
| 
| Joe
|  
| 
| janvapan wrote:
| 
| >What ethernet cards I should use for Linux 2.4?.
| >I am looking for a NIC based on stability and performance.
| >In short, Intel PRO/100 S Desktop Adapter(e100 driver) or
| >3Com 10/100 3C905C-TX-M(3c59x driver) ?
| >
| 
| 
| -
| To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
| the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
| More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
| Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Tim Hockin]

> My stock recommendation is thus SMC EtherPower II cards.

I've been happy with Natsemi controllers (Netgear FA-311 and Fa-312).

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[John Jasen]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Ken Brownfield wrote:

> Haven't had any issues at all with eepro100 or e100 under production
> load for years.  Since Tulip went out of the mainstream (poor Digital)
> the EtherExpress has been the most stable everywhere I've been.  I've
> written too many scripts for 3Com boxes that grep dmesg for "fatal"
> errors and unload/reload the 3com module.

Ran into problems with Intel EtherExpress cards under Alpha a while back,
and I've had a _lot_ of problems with the revision of the EtherExpress
built into motherboards, versus the intel or kernel drivers for them.

My stock recommendation is thus SMC EtherPower II cards.

--
-- John E. Jasen (jjasen1@umbc.edu)
-- In theory, theory and practise are the same. In practise, they aren't.

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Michael Sterrett -Mr. Bones.-]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Tim Hockin wrote:

> I've been happy with Natsemi controllers (Netgear FA-311 and Fa-312).

Have you tried those with cables longer than 20 feet?  I was totally happy
with my Netgear cards with a 10ft crossover until I tried connecting a
couple of new computers to my file server in the closet with 25ft CAT5
and then all the UDP (most noticeably NFS) traffic turned to crap.

I returned everything and got all D-link hardware.  Works great.  I'm not
going to buy Netgear hardware for the foreseeable future.

Michael Sterrett
  -Mr. Bones.-
michael.sterrett@coat.com

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[John Jasen]

On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Tim Hockin wrote:

> > My stock recommendation is thus SMC EtherPower II cards.
>
> I've been happy with Natsemi controllers (Netgear FA-311 and Fa-312).

I've had luck with them too, as well as the SMC EZNET cards (8139too
driver) in workstations, windoze boxes and freebsd.

But the EZNET NICS especially seem to crack up under high load.

--
-- John E. Jasen (jjasen1@umbc.edu)
-- In theory, theory and practise are the same. In practise, they aren't.

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Francois Romieu]

John Jasen <jjasen1@umbc.edu> :
[...]
> My stock recommendation is thus SMC EtherPower II cards.

Not all revisions behave the same here. For a few months, I've seen
3c905{b/c} working fine where etherpower II suffered.
YMMV. A lot.

-- 
Ueimor

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[J Sloan]

Ken Brownfield wrote:

>Ah, I bet you didn't live through the truly atrocious 3Com drivers of
>the past. ;)  The new 3Com stuff seems passable for desktops, but having
>been bitten dozens of times, I'm about 4^4^4^4 times shy.
>
I didn't really start using 3coms until
a couple of years ago...

>That's all logged (dmesg, etc), if not distinctly queryable.  Don't the
>iANS tools allow this functionality, and more?
>
yes, you can grope through the logs (as part of
the process of puzzling it out) and there are
ways to get the information - but it's so much
nicer to just get the speed and duplex from
an mii-command, on the spot.


>
>
>Oh, and six years of production on hundreds of EtherExpress NICs with
>zero (0) issues.  Obviously, not everyone sees every bug, but the
>preponderance of evidence I've seen in production environments puts the
>EE way ahead of 3Com.  
>
Well, like I say it's a mixed bag. We have mail/dns
servers (580 dns domains, 100,000 messages/day)
that have been runing for over 600 days, and not
a hint of trouble from the eepro100 drivers.

OTOH we have some new dell boxes with intel
pro 100 nics where we can quickly get the "eth0
reports no resources" message and poor or no
connectivity with a couple hours of apachebench
on a 100 MB lan.

could be a chipset issue...

>3Com for Windows desktops works just fine.
>
windoze desktops? give them ne2000s, who cares.

>
>I'd like to try existing Tulip hardware though for another option.
>Though 8139too seems to work well.
>

I've heard the horror stories about realtek
cards, but they seem to work well for me -

Joe

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Kelsey Hudson]

On Sun, 3 Mar 2002, janvapan wrote:

Get the intel.

> 
> What ethernet cards I should use for Linux 2.4?.
> I am looking for a NIC based on stability and performance.
> In short, Intel PRO/100 S Desktop Adapter(e100 driver) or
> 3Com 10/100 3C905C-TX-M(3c59x driver) ?
> 
> thank you,
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/
> 

-- 
 Kelsey Hudson                                           khudson@ctica.com 
 Associate Software Engineer
 Compendium Technologies, Inc                               (619) 725-0771
---------------------------------------------------------------------------     
==== 0100101101001001010000110100101100100000010010010101010000100001 =====

RE: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Kelsey Hudson]

On Sun, 3 Mar 2002, LA Walsh @ tlinx.org wrote:

> Any recommendations for the most  Linux-friendly/best performance,
> 2-ethernet port cards?  Is there a website one could go to find Linux
> Compatible and Linux-ease-of-use hardware and software products?  Comparisons?
> Etc?

Linda, I've got a dual port Intel eepro100 card in this machine. I've had 
it close to a year, with nothing but excellent performance and stability. 
I can't say the same thing for other cards i've tried in here, namingly 
the 3com adapters everyone seems to think are so great. I won't even touch 
a 3com adapter anymore, but i digress...  These dual eepro100 cards can be 
had used for relatively cheap; i think I purchased this one for $45USD 
when i bought it...

Re: Recommendations about a 100/10 NIC

[Ken Brownfield]

The SMC cards used to be Tulip before epic.  I had the same module
problems with epic too, so we had to go to EE from Tulip when that
happened. :(

I suspect a lot of the problems depend on the motherboard or
architecture, as well as the switching hardware.

-- 
Ken.
brownfld@irridia.com

On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 12:36:24PM -0500, John Jasen wrote:
| On Wed, 6 Mar 2002, Ken Brownfield wrote:
| 
| > Haven't had any issues at all with eepro100 or e100 under production
| > load for years.  Since Tulip went out of the mainstream (poor Digital)
| > the EtherExpress has been the most stable everywhere I've been.  I've
| > written too many scripts for 3Com boxes that grep dmesg for "fatal"
| > errors and unload/reload the 3com module.
| 
| Ran into problems with Intel EtherExpress cards under Alpha a while back,
| and I've had a _lot_ of problems with the revision of the EtherExpress
| built into motherboards, versus the intel or kernel drivers for them.
| 
| My stock recommendation is thus SMC EtherPower II cards.
| 
| --
| -- John E. Jasen (jjasen1@umbc.edu)
| -- In theory, theory and practise are the same. In practise, they aren't.