Received: by oss.sgi.com id ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 03:01:29 -0800 Received: from ns.caldera.de ([212.34.180.1]:11793 "EHLO ns.caldera.de") by oss.sgi.com with ESMTP id ; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 03:01:05 -0800 Received: (from hch@localhost) by ns.caldera.de (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA14789; Fri, 1 Dec 2000 12:00:06 +0100 Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2000 12:00:06 +0100 Message-Id: <200012011100.MAA14789@ns.caldera.de> From: Christoph Hellwig To: cw@f00f.org (Chris Wedgwood) Cc: Ivan Passos , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, romieu@ensta.fr Subject: Re: [RFC] Configuring synchronous interfaces in Linux X-Newsgroups: caldera.lists.linux.kernel In-Reply-To: <20001201233227.A9457@metastasis.f00f.org> User-Agent: tin/1.4.1-19991201 ("Polish") (UNIX) (Linux/2.2.14 (i686)) Sender: owner-netdev@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk Return-Path: X-Orcpt: rfc822;netdev-outgoing In article <20001201233227.A9457@metastasis.f00f.org> you wrote: > Actually; Ethernet badly needs something like this too. I would kill > to be able to do something like: > ifconfig eth0 speed 100 duplex full > o across different networks cards -- I've been thinking about it of > late as I had to battle with this earlier this week; depending on > what network card you use, you need different magic incarnations to > do the above. > A standard interface is really needed; unless anyone objects I may > look at drafting something up -- but it will require some input if it > is not to look completely Ethernet centric. For ethernet we have ethtool, recently changed from sparc only to architecture independend. Christoph -- Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.