If you hard set the port and the client to 100 full do you continue to get errors? (i.e. is it a symptom of auto-negotiation or does it happen regardless of negotiation being on or off) Michael
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:04 PM, William Affeldt <[email protected]>wrote: > It negotiates correctly and gets errors. I have tested with 4 different > pc's and I get the same result. The switch negotiates 100 full and slowly > counts errors. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Joe Astorino <[email protected]> > To: William Affeldt; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] < > [email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; > [email protected] <[email protected]> > Sent: Thu May 14 11:52:41 2009 > Subject: RE: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Switch and pc auto neg. > > Hey Bill, > > Are you talking about auto speed, auto duplex, or both? There is a pretty > good explanation of this in the first few chapters of the R/S exam cert > guide v3 I believe. Don't quote me on it, but I think that with duplex, if > you have auto on the switch and hard set it on the PC side the switch has > to > fall back to the default which is half duplex. Check out that book though, > there is a good explanation. Hope that helps a little > > > Regards, > > Joe Astorino > CCIE #24347 (R&S) > Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. > URL: http://www.IPexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of William Affeldt > Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 1:44 PM > To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' > Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' > Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Switch and pc auto neg. > > Does anyone know the exact reason why if a switchport is set to auto and > a > pc is hard set to anything it negotiates but gets errors? > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Jared Scrivener <[email protected]> > To: William Affeldt; [email protected] <[email protected]>; > [email protected] <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; > [email protected] <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed May 13 21:26:04 2009 > Subject: RE: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Section 1 lab 18.6 > > They are synonyms in a sense. CAR is a policing method, but one of many. > > Cheers, > > Jared Scrivener CCIE3 #16983 (R&S, Security, SP), CISSP Sr. Technical > Instructor - IPexpert, Inc. > URL: http://www.IPexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> > Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 > Fax: +1.810.454.0130 > Mailto: [email protected] > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of William Affeldt > Sent: Wednesday, 13 May 2009 10:31 PM > To: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' > Cc: '[email protected]'; '[email protected]' > Subject: [OSL | CCIE_RS] Section 1 lab 18.6 > > Can some one explain when to use policing and when to use CAR. The question > said policing and the proctor guide used CAR. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [email protected] > <[email protected]> > To: Robert S Wyzykowski <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>; > [email protected] <[email protected]> > Sent: Wed May 13 18:17:25 2009 > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] MRM Volume 3 Lab 7 Section 5.3 > > Robert, > > R4 does not need to join. Can you post your config? > If I get packet loss, I usually join the group manually and test using > pings, debugging along the way. > > Bryan Bartik > CCIE #23707 (R&S), CCNP > Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. > URL: http://www.IPexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> > > > On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Robert S Wyzykowski <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > I can't seem to get a successful test, and I don't know how to > troubleshoot why. Getting 100% packet loss. > The MRM configuration is pretty straight forward. Does R4 need to > join the group 230.230.230.230 for this to have a successful test? I do a > mtrace from R2 for 230.230.230.230 and there's nothing there. > > I watched the video solution, I have everything in place as > instructed, but no love. > > Please help. > Cheers! > > > > > > > > Robert Wyzykowski > Manager, Global Telecommunications > IMERYS > 30 Mansell Court East - Suite 220 > Roswell, GA, USA > Phone: +1 770 645 3734 > Mobile: +1 404-434 9000 > > > > > > > From: Dale Shaw > <[email protected]<dale.shaw%[email protected]> > <mailto:dale.shaw%[email protected] <dale.shaw%[email protected]>> > > To: Joe Astorino <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected] > Date: 05/13/2009 07:00 PM > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_RS] test > > ________________________________ > > > > > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:24 AM, Joe Astorino > <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello? : ) > > > > Regards, > > > > Joe Astorino > > CCIE #24347 (R&S),CCDP,CCNP,CCDA,CCNA > > Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc. > > URL: http://www.IPexpert.com <http://www.ipexpert.com/> < > http://www.ipexpert.com/> > > Ha! Great result :-) > > cheers, > Dale > > > > > > > -- > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 8.5.323 / Virus Database: 270.12.27/2112 - Release Date: 05/14/09 > 06:28:00 >
