Talk:Autonegotiation/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Good article

Latest comment: 18 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I guess this article might qualify as a good article, and I intend to nominate it at Wikipedia:Good article candidates (Liberatore, 2006). 12:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Removed from the article

Latest comment: 15 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Note that some switch operating systems, as well as some card drivers, still have the option to disable autonegotiation and force a twisted pair connection to 1000Base-T full duplex or 1000Base-T half duplex, but this is against specification and should never be used because this way the other parameters required for Gigabit Ethernet operation are not negotiated. The correct way for forcing Gigabit Ethernet operation is to enable autonegotiation, but limit the advertised capabilities to the 1000Base-T ones only[1].

A doubt was raised about "still have the option to disable autonegotiation" at Talk:Ethernet. Source should be provided. (Liberatore, 2006). 12:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Well this is a way old discussion and I'm not going to add the section back, but here's a quote from a Sun document showing they did offer hardware with this capability (1000 Full-forced, Autoneg-disabled), "The IEEE 802.3ab specification does not allow for forced mode 1000BASE-T with autonegotiation disabled running at 1000 Mbps. As a result, many switch vendors do not support forced mode. Although the transceiver used in the Sun™ Gigaswift Ethernet UTP adapter 1.0 is configurable for the 1000 Mbps forced mode and the ce driver allows this mode be aware that it does not work under certain circumstances." Ethernet Autonegotiation Best Practices [2].SDNick484 (talk) 22:33, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Updates needed for IEEE 802.3-2008

Latest comment: 13 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Requested improvements in place

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This page could be updated to include the fact that 10GBASE-T (10 gigabit ethernet over copper) now also requires autonegotiation and that Extended Next Pages were added in the standard and are required for 10GBASE-T autonegotation. The Priority table section would also need to have 10GBASE-T added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Blockfloetenspieler (talk • contribs) 22:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Auto-negotiation confusion

Latest comment: 11 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

This page states explicitly that when auto-negotiation fails a device that is trying negotiate should go to half-duplex. I am familar with one implementation (JunOS for J-Series, ver 11.1R3.5) that goes to full duplex instead. I have also read the description in the first reference in the article and have been unable to discover any requirement to fail back to half-duplex. This does happen with Cisco implementations, but doesn't seem to be part of the standard. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.200.231.211 (talk) 06:08, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Section 28.2.3.1 of 802.3

"NOTE 2—When selecting the highest common denominator through the Parallel Detection function, only the halfduplex

mode corresponding to the selected PMA may automatically be detected."

I intepret this as a requirement to assume half duplex but I can see how it could possiblly be interpreted otherwise. Plugwash (talk) 12:38, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Autonegotiation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:22, 22 October 2016 (UTC)