Permanent full-duplex
-
-
http://faq.pfsense.org/index.php?action=artikel&cat=10&id=38&artlang=en&highlight=hidden%20options
-
ha. thx. i was searching in /etc/ where the config files are defaultly stored in freebsd but i found nothing.
thx again. :] -
No problem, please report back if you get it working.
-
btw. i think it could be a good idea to put access to nic`s settings on webgui, ie speed & duplex. what do ya think, men ? :P
"No problem, please report back if you get it working."
oka, ill try it now.
-
I don't see this happening. You would be amazed at how many ppl hard code these settings and get themself into a world of hurt and then blame it on the product itself. In addition there is a number of other reasons that do not occur to me but I can tell you that we have talked about this many many times and we never can see the benefits of such a feature.
-
yepp. you gotta men, its working, straight forward.
but let me air my attitude to nic`s settings and say why is see it helpful.
on wan side i use lucent cellpipe set to full-duplex (probably adsl, which uses one telephone pair of copper cables, is a half-duplex line, so lucent could be set to half-duplex with no bandwidth/performance influence, but nevermind :P). unfortunately no nic can detect, that my lucent is set to f-d, whey can see only it is 10mb/s link. in this case, nics set to 10mb/s with half-duplex. eventually link is agreed with h-d on one side and f-d on second, but generates lots of collisions.
with easy access to nic
s setting via webgui i can set this, save & forget. if i change my modem i can get there easily and set it back to h-d. at this moment, user needs to search on faq, or start new topics, if hes too lazy to do the first thing… and eventually set it by fingerof course, some ppl can see nic`s settings via webgui as a strenght, other as a weakness (as u said, more settings - higher probability to break the system).
so... thanks for help, again :]
-
Not that more settings means more things for people to break, but exposing a setting that shouldn't be used the vast majority of the time will lead to what Scott said - "You would be amazed at how many ppl hard code these settings and get themself into a world of hurt and then blame it on the product itself."
Too many people think forcing speed and duplex is a "performance tweak". It's absolutely not, and in fact, many times leaves you with a duplex mismatch which will destroy your network throughput. You have to be careful to leave both sides on auto, or hard code speed and duplex on both sides. Any other combination will leave you with a duplex mismatch virtually always (there are always some exceptions with the amount of quirky network equipment out there).
The just of it, is if you put that option there where people see it, they'll think "oh, yeah, I want 100 Mb full duplex!" even if we put a big nasty warning there. Then the majority of the time, they'll end up with a duplex mismatch. Leaving it out is really the best option, we believe. Out of sight, out of mind.
-
"Out of sight, out of mind."
well, in most cases it is good strategy. but… :P
i wouldnt say that many users will try to 'tweak' net forcing nics to 100mb/s when wiring system lets only 10mb/s. (of course - everythings possible) even if they set it and break the network, they shouldnt blame pfSense. but, if they eventually do so, it means they are really big lamaz. and i think, that no matter why, but big lamaz market isnt a target market for pfSense.
also, pfSense at this point of development offers much more complicated features, which can collapse network (with a little help from really big lamaz - RBL), than just an easy nic`s speed and duplex settings.
i know - more people using pfSense, greater audience, advertisement and popularity. but pfSense isnt for lamaz and it should be widespread and known.
-
I say leave it out. I'm a bit of a "llama" as you put it. But I have managed to learn from not knowing pretty much anything to knowing how to setup a network with pfsense doing my routing, with port forwarding/NAT etc, and I know what almost all the options do etc.
Just by reading everything and asking the odd question, infact I chose pfense because it looked like the easiest one ( I think I was a little wrong on that call though :) ).
I remember one of my questions being, "why is my red/WAN nic running in halfduplex mode, is it supposed to be?". I guarentee if that option were avialable I would have definatly tried it before asking any questions or reading up on what it did, until I broke something.
But in saying that, all it needs is a little warning beside it such as. "Leave this to auto unless you really know what you are doing, as it may lead to a duplex mismatch which will degrade performance".