em3 no carrier
Claude Marinier
claude.marinier at cae.com
Wed Dec 18 00:43:33 UTC 2013
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Tuexen [mailto:Michael.Tuexen at lurchi.franken.de]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 5:24 PM
To: Claude Marinier
Cc: freebsd-net at freebsd.org
Subject: Re: em3 no carrier
On Dec 17, 2013, at 10:51 PM, Claude Marinier <claude.marinier at cae.com> wrote:
>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Rodrigo Osorio [mailto:rodrigo at bebik.net]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2013 11:40 AM
>>> To: Claude Marinier
>>> Cc: freebsd-net at freebsd.org
>>> Subject: Re: em3 no carrier
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Can you give us more informations about the network card / chips ?
>>> Did you found any error in /var/log/ ?
>>>
>>> - rodrigo
>>
>> My apologies, I missed that bit of information.
>>
>> Yes, there is an error in /var/log/messages.
>>
>> Dec 17 11:33:07 WANemu bird: OSPF: Socket error on em3: No buffer
>> space available Dec 17 11:33:47 WANemu last message repeated 4 times
>> Dec 17 11:35:57 WANemu last message repeated 13 times Dec 17 11:45:57
>> WANemu last message repeated 60 times Dec 17 11:55:47 WANemu last
>> message repeated 59 times
>>
>>
>> Also note that the HP NC364T uses an Intel 82571EB chipset.
>>
>>> On 17/12/13 11:27 -0500, Claude Marinier wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> This is a WAN emulator (ipfw, DummyNet, and BIRD). FreeBSD 9.2
>>>> Release (amd64) is running on DL360 G5 with a new NC364T quad-port
>>>> Ethernet NIC. I installed the new NIC yesterday. The four ports are
>>>> connected to routers in a lab.
>>>>
>>>> FreeBSD WAMemu 9.2-RELEASE FreeBSD 9.2-RELEASE #0 r255898: Thu Sep
>>>> 26 22:50:31 UTC 2013 root at
>>>> bake.isc.freebsd.org:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
>>>>
>>>> Dec 16 17:13:19 WANemu kernel: em3: <Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network
>>>> Connection 7.3.8> port 0x6020-0x603f mem
>>>> 0xfdee0000-0xfdefffff,0xfde00000-0xfde7ffff irq 17 at device 0.1 on
>>>> pci22 Dec 16 17:13:19 WANemu kernel: em3: Using an MSI interrupt
>>>> Dec 16 17:13:19 WANemu kernel: em3: Ethernet address:
>>>> e8:39:35:13:21:6e
>>>>
>>>> The four em interfaces are configured the same way (lines in
>>>> rc.conf are identical except for IP address.
>>>>
>>>> ifconfig_em3="inet x.y.113.197/29 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex"
>>>> ifconfig_em0="inet x.y.113.14/29 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex"
>>>> ifconfig_em2="inet x.y.113.109/29 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex"
>>>> ifconfig_em1="inet x.y.113.189/29 media 100baseTX mediaopt full-duplex"
>>>>
>>>> The GE 0/1 port on the Cisco 2821 shows no link and ifconfig shows
>>>> "no carrier" for em3. Oddly, it also shows autoselect.
>>>>
>>>> em0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
>>>> options=4019b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO>
>>>> ether e8:39:35:13:21:6d
>>>> inet x.y.113.14 netmask 0xfffffff8 broadcast x.y.113.15
>>>> inet6 fe80::ea39:35ff:fe13:216d%em0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1
>>>> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
>>>> media: Ethernet 100baseTX <full-duplex>
>>>> status: active
>>>> em1: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
>>>> options=4019b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO>
>>>> ether e8:39:35:13:21:6c
>>>> inet x.y.113.189 netmask 0xfffffff8 broadcast x.y.113.191
>>>> inet6 fe80::ea39:35ff:fe13:216c%em1 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x2
>>>> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
>>>> media: Ethernet 100baseTX <full-duplex>
>>>> status: active
>>>> em2: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
>>>> options=4019b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO>
>>>> ether e8:39:35:13:21:6f
>>>> inet 131.140.113.109 netmask 0xfffffff8 broadcast 131.140.113.111
>>>> inet6 fe80::ea39:35ff:fe13:216f%em2 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x3
>>>> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
>>>> media: Ethernet 100baseTX <full-duplex>
>>>> status: active
>>>> em3: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
>>>> options=4019b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,VLAN_HWTSO>
>>>> ether e8:39:35:13:21:6e
>>>> inet 131.140.113.197 netmask 0xfffffff8 broadcast 131.140.113.199
>>>> inet6 fe80::ea39:35ff:fe13:216e%em3 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x4
>>>> nd6 options=29<PERFORMNUD,IFDISABLED,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
>>>> media: Ethernet 100baseTX <full-duplex> (autoselect)
>>>> status: no carrier
>>>>
>>>> I have tried three Ethernet cables with no difference. This
>>>> morning, I briefly booted Puppy Linux from USB and manually
>>>> configured the four Ethernet interfaces. They all work (ping good
>>>> to all four routers); the Cisco on em3 shows happy lights. I then
>>>> booted back into FreeBSD, the problem with em3 remains. I have not
>>>> had any success searching with Google; I may not have used suitable search terms.
>>>>
>>>> One more odd symptom: bmon has trouble with these interfaces.
>>>>
>>>> em0è95^S!m on WANemu
>>>> Name
>>>> qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq
>>>> WANemu (local)
>>>> 0 em0è95^S!m
>>>> 1 em1è95^S!l
>>>> 2 em2è95^S!o
>>>> 3 em3è95^S!n
>>>> 4 usbus0
>>>> 5 usbus1
>>>> 6 usbus2
>>>> 7 usbus3
>>>> 8 usbus4
>>>> 9 usbus5
>>>> 10 ipfw0
>>>> 11 lo0
>>>>
>>>> It looks like FreeBSD is somehow mishandling these interfaces.
>>>> Before purchasing it, I searched with Google and found reports of
>>>> people using this device without problems. I do not know how to proceed.
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your help.
>
> Oddly, replacing em3 with bce1 left the system with only two
> functionning interfaces. The order of the interface definitions in
> rc.local makes a difference. The worst order is bce1, em0, em2, em1
> which left only
> em0 and em2 working. Changing the order to bce1, em0, em1, em2 allows
> the three 'em' interfaces to work. In both, bce1 is not working (no
> carrier). Changing the order to em0, em1, em2, bce1 did not improve
> the situation.
>
> This is a WAN emulator and the rc.conf definitions are generated by
> the configuration program from site names, hence the odd order. I am
> changing the order manually.
>
> I have reconfigured the Cisco router to use G0/0 instead of G0/1. This
> has made no noticeable difference.
Did you configure it to 100MBit, full-duplex?
-------
Yes, I configured everything (all eight interfaces: four on FreeBSD and one on each of the routers) to be 100baseTX and full-duplex.
As a test, I left out the 'media' and 'mediaopt' portions of the interface definitions in rc.conf and all the interfaces came up but three were in half-duplex mode, I think em0 was full-duplex (I am not in the lab to check).
I have heard horror stories about Ethernet auto sensing, so I make sure the Cisco routers and FreeBSD specify 100 Mbps and full-duplex. I begin to wonder if even that is safe. :-(
[ why does Outlook not quote properly ]
More information about the freebsd-net
mailing list