Re: [pfSense-discussion] Intel 82559ER switch

2007-06-19 Thread RB
Are details on the Broadcom switch controllers openly available? I did not find anything on their web site. Nor did I, but the header file indicates it came from Broadcom: https://svn.openwrt.org/openwrt/tags/kamikaze_7.06/package/switch/src/etc53xx.h Relevant comment: /* * Broadcom Home

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Intel 82559ER switch

2007-06-18 Thread RB
FWIW, OpenWRT has some utils built-in to deal with these chipsets, I just don't have it working yet - robocfg. They've deprecated it in favor of a kernel driver, but all it does is uses a header file from Broadcom and twiddles some ioctls on the associated ethernet port according to the magic

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Intel 82559ER switch

2007-06-18 Thread David W . Hess
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 21:32:35 -0500, RB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: FWIW, OpenWRT has some utils built-in to deal with these chipsets, I just don't have it working yet - robocfg. They've deprecated it in favor of a kernel driver, but all it does is uses a header file from Broadcom and twiddles some

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Intel 82559ER switch

2007-06-17 Thread Nick Buraglio
What was the OS that had the support that you suggested? nb On 6/17/07, RB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As things stand, devices on separate ports are capable of communicating with each other, but the traffic is unseen on fxp0. Well, this is the normal behaviour of a switch... Agreed - I was

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Intel 82559ER switch

2007-06-17 Thread Nick Buraglio
/suggested/expected/ On 6/17/07, Nick Buraglio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What was the OS that had the support that you suggested? nb On 6/17/07, RB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As things stand, devices on separate ports are capable of communicating with each other, but the traffic is unseen

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Intel 82559ER switch

2007-06-17 Thread RB
On 6/17/07, Nick Buraglio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What was the OS that had the support that you expected? A crufty blend of only the finest proprietary software, based on VxWorks. x86 architecture. RB

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Intel 82559ER switch

2007-06-17 Thread David W . Hess
On Sun, 17 Jun 2007 11:23:29 -0500, RB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As things stand, devices on separate ports are capable of communicating with each other, but the traffic is unseen on fxp0. Well, this is the normal behaviour of a switch... Agreed - I was just more hoping it was implemented

Re: [pfSense-discussion] Intel 82559ER switch

2007-06-17 Thread RB
You can probably get the IC part number for the switch by visual inspection and possibly a data sheet through Google. The controllers I am familiar with even have configurable limited VLAN support. Seems it's a Broadcom BCM5325; since it had an adhered t-wing, I was unwilling to disturb the