SCOUG-HELP Mailing List Archives
Return to [ 07 |
May |
2004 ]
<< Previous Message <<
Content Type: text/plain
=====================================================
If you are responding to someone asking for help who
may not be a member of this list, be sure to use the
REPLY TO ALL feature of your email program.
=====================================================
On Fri, 7 May 2004 10:45:13 PDT7, Steve Schiffman wrote:
>Since there was no error messages and two changes where made at the same
>time (the hub [I really hope that you got the EtherFast switch instead the
>hub] and the PC Card for the Thinkpad)
Well, to be really precise, one should say "...at nearly the same time.." since
I did -- briefly -- test the new hub before I undertook to change out the PC
Card.
Also, I did purchase a new hub, vice the switch. It didn't occur to me to
other than another hub, since that is what I was replacing and the Linksys
literature indicated that it would do what I was hoping to be able to do. I'm
prepare to purchase a switch, however, if there is some good reason to do so.
>I suggest that you re-install the
>previously working EtherJet PC Card. Run MPTS, select the EtherJet PCCard
>nic, click CHANGE, then save the updated configuration. Shutdown, change
>the PC cards and boot back up. Report on what is working and what is not.
I did as suggested -- in fact, had determined that I would do so before your
note arrived -- and I now have a functioning peer network running OS/2. I have
yet to get NT to do other than give the "general network failure" error
message, which isn't very informative. That, however, it not a problem that I
expect to get resolved in this forum.
Which brings me to the question of why the EtherFast PC Card (or the hub?)
isn't working as advertised, i.e., autosensing speed differences and adjusting
accordingly. I have sent a query to Linksys Support but have not yet received
a reply. In the meantime, I have done some research in their knowledgebase.
According to their information, a failure to autosense can be caused by a cable
that doesn't conform to the 568B cabling standard. I'm pursuing that line of
inquiry and my try ordering a better cable, although the one I am using was
purchased new just a couple of days ago. According to the package, it is a "7'
350MHz CAT5e UTP CABLE". Says nothing about the cabling standard, however.
Thoughts?
--gary
=====================
ggranat@earthlink.net
=====================================================
To unsubscribe from this list, send an email message
to "steward@scoug.com". In the body of the message,
put the command "unsubscribe scoug-help".
For problems, contact the list owner at
"rollin@scoug.com".
=====================================================
<< Previous Message <<
Return to [ 07 |
May |
2004 ]
The Southern California OS/2 User Group
P.O. Box 26904
Santa Ana, CA 92799-6904, USA
Copyright 2001 the Southern California OS/2 User Group. ALL RIGHTS
RESERVED.
SCOUG, Warp Expo West, and Warpfest are trademarks of the Southern California OS/2 User Group.
OS/2, Workplace Shell, and IBM are registered trademarks of International
Business Machines Corporation.
All other trademarks remain the property of their respective owners.
|