[Asterisk-Users] Snom firmwares suck <--additional datapoint to consider

[Rich Adamson]

Colin Anderson wrote:
>> More cowbell?
> 
> Shit, you owe me a new keyboard! Funniest thing I've *ever* read on the
> list. 
> 
> I've experienced the auto-negotiate issue with Snom's before. I forgot to
> mention that we make it part of our standard install to force 100baseT-full.
> I've also noticed the Catalyst does the spanning-tree thing and waits up to
> 30 seconds before  enabling the port - this can cause problems with Snoms
> because they boot before the Catalyst enables the port, causing registration
> to fail. Then you warm-boot the Snom and everything's OK. 

The same spanning tree issue (not forwarding packets for 30 to 60 
seconds) is also a problem with most of the newer PC systems 
(particularly with MS O/S) as the system boots up quicker then when the 
switch is ready to forward traffic. An MS O/S system begins broadcasting 
for domain controllers (etc) before the switch is ready to forward 
traffic resulting in some very strange problems that most Sys Admins 
diagnose incorrectly.

> One last interesting tidbit: We have a *lot* of Dell Dimensions with super
> craptastic embedded Ethernet. They will auto negotiate with a Snom (plugged
> into the PC port) to 100baseT full, but then you can't ping or TX past the
> phone itself. Oddly enough, it gets an IP from our DHCP server OK. Forcing
> the Dell to 100baseT full, half, or even 10 full works 100% of the time.
> This never happens on any kind of decent Ethernet card like an 82557 chip or
> 3com. If we have an Optiplex, it *just works*

Right on! But, its not just the Dell products. There are a fair number 
of other products with the same issue, and a few "drivers" that have 
half/duplex backwards (set it to half and the interface operates in 
full, or, setting to either half or full fails but "auto" works in full 
duplex just fine).