Kinda upset at the lack of response to GBe issues

[amc2012]

I have never run a GbE network at home;  most people have not.  My entire network is 10/100 as are most people's home networks; why--?  Because once a network is setup (mine years and years ago) why setup another one.  All of my devices are 100 now. None of my devices are GbE. 

it takes a full twenty-five years to fully adopt a new technology to the 'common place' status. GbE is not there yet. And, as you can see not only by the varying opinions on the subject but also by the varying status reports, GbE is not the standard some of you have been hoping it would be. 

This issue seems to be a 'tolerance' timing environment specific problem that can be resolved with the right hardware and configuration. There have been some recent developments in that direction.  I hope your situation may be corrected also. Obviously packets are going to be lost and through-put is going to be low if auto negotiation occurs every couple of seconds. 

Best of luck to you.

I think with the arrival of faster wireless, you're probably right - people probably moved from their wired 10/100 to the wireless G instead of moving to GbE. It's probably one reason why there aren't more complaints about this. I didn't think I was a particularly early adopter of GbE at home, since switches got cheap fast, and not long after we saw the benefits at work, I wanted the same at home. 

The twenty-five year figure probably depends on the technology. But even if your figure is true at face value, that doesn't mean the specifications aren't nailed down sooner. In this case, I would blame the chip vendor long before I blamed Cisco, D-Link, or Netgear, who made the switches I tried and who should well have known what the requirements were to allow traffic to flow reliably in a stable GbE environment. Nearly two decades in, there should be no "learning" necessary to provide GbE speeds and to negotiate that setting. 

Respectfully, this isn't a situation of "well this is all still very new." It's an issue of some chip vendor not manufacturing to spec, and that seems to be the line that the PINE folks are pursuing at this point. 

We're lucky there may be a workaround for this, but the finger pointing still goes to hardware I think. Whether that's the PINE design or chips not to spec, I dunno. But since other board makers are running into GbE issues with this chip, I think we know where the issue lies. Again, thanks to those here who have made efforts toward workarounds.