There are some diffs between T and X 1G. T should not work without autoneg(AN) (because PMA and PCS rely on AN). X should work without autoneg. Maybe this links will help:
T: https://www.iol.unh.edu/services/testing/ge/knowledgebase/1000BASE-T_PMA_Jul y2004.pdf X: https://www.iol.unh.edu/services/testing/ge/knowledgebase/1000BASE-X_PCS_and _PMA.pdf General Info about AN in 1G: https://www.iol.unh.edu/services/testing/ge/knowledgebase/Clause_37_Auto-Neg otiation.pdf //TS -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag von Peter Rathlev Gesendet: Freitag, 25. Januar 2013 09:58 An: Alan Buxey Cc: [email protected] Betreff: Re: [c-nsp] Confirmation of Gigabit Ethernet autonegotiation behavior On Fri, 2013-01-25 at 08:34 +0000, Alan Buxey wrote: > Probably better looking at the RFC ...however , duplex? Gigabit > requires full duplex. You can't have half duplex... Actually you can. :-) IEEE 802.3 claus 37.2.1.3 describes half duplex for 1000BASE-X. It doesn't make a lot of operational sense, but it's possible. -- Peter _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
