Article View: uk.comp.os.win95
Article #587Re: Networking/LAN woes!!
From: Tom Bird
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:00
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 1999 00:00
32 lines
2791 bytes
2791 bytes
In article <RmzAvSAHc7+3EwlT@ghastly.demon.co.uk>, 'Dungeon' Dave <Dungeon@SpamNot.Here> writes >.. and it came to pass that Tom Bird <hamster@nospam.demon.c >o.uk> uttered forth: >>For the record, I just tried full duplex on my new UTP network and the >>"collisions" light just flashed a lot when it was used. >> >>I changed 2 of the 5 connected machines to full duplex. >> >>Non duplex -> Non duplex - normal, as expected. >>Duplex -> Non duplex - more collisions, slight lowering of data rate. >>Duplex -> Duplex - Collisions by the bucketload, very slow data transfer. > >ISTR something in the README of 3Com card software advising >that you should only use Full Duplex if ALL devices on your >network support it. If you've got a switched hub then there's some >protection, but it warned against flicking one card onto full unless >you were planning on taking the network down quickly. I think one of them (digital) is set to full duplex anyway, I get a lot of collisions when I talk to it. And I've left the setup disk at home. >Is it possible for you to try flicking ALL 5 connected machines to >full-D, or at least taking the non-F/D off the network and compare >the collisions? I'm interested in knowing what happens (don't feel >like a guinea-pig, do you Tom?) More of a Hamster. I did test it, I set two to full duplex and disconnected the rest. It just went like last time. Not to worry, I think you would need a switch for full duplex. TB Busby the cat 1984 - 22.9.1999 :(
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<mtvCzKAC3O$3Ewbu@dbqa.demon.co.uk>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mailReferences:
<588.934T2800T12065120@redrobe.demon.co.uk> <938028239.18454.0.nnrp-12.d4e48b20@news.demon.co.uk> <kKbVDCAjKV63EwgH@urban75.demon.co.uk> <1008.935T1700T6714676@redrobe.demon.co.uk> <KXyOUEAFlo63EwVJ@urban75.demon.co.uk> <3kjrN36j3Ms7hmXUR0SG96zGV5PG@news.arrakeen.arrakis.nu> <04bxPCAia363EwBm@urban75.demon.co.uk> <37f5e203.15868836@news.f9.net.uk> <KdtUJGAx0x83EwVT@ch-w.demon.co.uk> <FqaF3fAuG+83Ewmy@dbqa.demon.co.uk> <IE9FkJABvE+3Ew0n@ch-w.demon.co.uk> <YWBCIBAJcy+3Ew2L@dbqa.demon.co.uk> <RmzAvSAHc7+3EwlT@ghastly.demon.co.uk>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1025cc,c47c11e7b6095439 X-Google-Attributes: gid1025cc,public X-Google-Thread: 1036bc,c47c11e7b6095439 X-Google-Attributes: gid1036bc,public From: Tom Bird <hamster@nospam.demon.co.uk> Subject: Re: Networking/LAN woes!! Date: 1999/10/07 Message-ID: <mtvCzKAC3O$3Ewbu@dbqa.demon.co.uk> X-Deja-AN: 534020242 Distribution: world X-NNTP-Posting-Host: dbqa.demon.co.uk:194.222.32.233 References: <588.934T2800T12065120@redrobe.demon.co.uk> <938028239.18454.0.nnrp-12.d4e48b20@news.demon.co.uk> <kKbVDCAjKV63EwgH@urban75.demon.co.uk> <1008.935T1700T6714676@redrobe.demon.co.uk> <KXyOUEAFlo63EwVJ@urban75.demon.co.uk> <3kjrN36j3Ms7hmXUR0SG96zGV5PG@news.arrakeen.arrakis.nu> <04bxPCAia363EwBm@urban75.demon.co.uk> <37f5e203.15868836@news.f9.net.uk> <KdtUJGAx0x83EwVT@ch-w.demon.co.uk> <FqaF3fAuG+83Ewmy@dbqa.demon.co.uk> <IE9FkJABvE+3Ew0n@ch-w.demon.co.uk> <YWBCIBAJcy+3Ew2L@dbqa.demon.co.uk> <RmzAvSAHc7+3EwlT@ghastly.demon.co.uk> X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 939323386 nnrp-14:16470 NO-IDENT dbqa.demon.co.uk:194.222.32.233 Organization: Tom's TeamServer MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: Tom Bird <nrp@dbqa.demon.co.uk> Newsgroups: uk.comp.os.win95,demon.tech.pc