Механизм Автосогласования в Ethernet-соединениях

Ethernet connection signaling mechanism

Autonegotiation is a signaling mechanism and procedure used by Ethernet over twisted pair by which two connected devices choose common transmission parameters, such as speed, duplex mode, and flow control. In this process, the connected devices first share their capabilities regarding these parameters and then choose the highest performance transmission mode they both support. Autonegotiation for twisted pair is defined in clause 28 of IEEE 802.3. and was originally an optional component in the Fast Ethernet standard. It is backwards compatible with the normal link pulses (NLP) used by 10BASE T. The protocol was significantly extended in the Gigabit Ethernet standard, and is mandatory for 1000BASE T gigabit Ethernet over twisted pair. In the OSI model, autonegotiation resides in the physical layer.

In 1995, the Fast Ethernet standard was released. Because this introduced a new speed option for the same wires, it included a means for connected network adapters to negotiate the best possible shared mode of operation. The autonegotiation protocol included in IEEE 802.3 clause 28 was developed from a patented technology by National Semiconductor known as NWay. The company gave a letter of assurance for anyone to use their system for a one time license fee. Another company has since bought the rights to that patent. The first version of the autonegotiation specification, in the 1995 IEEE 802.3u Fast Ethernet standard, was implemented differently by different manufacturers leading to interoperability issues. These problems led many network administrators to manually set the speed and duplex mode of each network interface. However, the use of manual configurations may lead to duplex mismatches. These can be difficult to diagnose because the network is nominally working. Simple network testing utilities such as ping may report a valid connection. However, network performance will be significantly impacted by transmission aborts and subsequent Ethernet frame drops that result from a duplex mismatch. When a duplex mismatch is occurring, the side of the connection that is using half duplex will report late collisions, while the side using full duplex will report FCS errors. The autonegotiation specification was improved in the 1998 release of IEEE 802.3. This was followed by the release of the IEEE 802.3ab Gigabit Ethernet standard in 1999 which specified mandatory autonegotiation for 1000BASE T. Autonegotiation is also mandatory for 1000BASE TX and 10GBASE T implementations. Currently, most network equipment manufacturers recommend using autonegotiation on all access ports and enable it as a factory default setting.

Autonegotiation can be used by devices that are capable of more than one transmission rate, different duplex modes (half duplex and full duplex), and different transmission standards at the same speed (though in practice only one standard at each speed is widely supported). During autonegotiation, each device declares its technology abilities, that is, its possible modes of operation. The best common mode is chosen, with higher speed preferred over lower, and full duplex preferred over half duplex at the same speed. Parallel detection is used when a device that is capable of autonegotiation is connected to one that is not. This happens if a device does not support autonegotiation or autonegotiation is disabled on a device. In this condition, the device that is capable of autonegotiation can determine and match speed with the other device. This procedure cannot determine duplex capability, so half duplex is always assumed. Other than speed and duplex mode, autonegotiation is used to communicate the master slave parameters for gigabit Ethernet.

Autonegotiation is based on pulses similar to those used by 10BASE T devices to detect the presence of a connection to another device. These link integrity test (LIT) pulses are sent by Ethernet devices when they are not sending or receiving any frames. They are unipolar positive only electrical pulses of a nominal duration of 100, with a maximum pulse width of 200, generated at a 16 time interval with a timing variation tolerance of 8. A device detects the failure of a link if neither a frame nor two of the LIT pulses is received for 50 150 ms. For this scheme to work, devices must send LIT pulses regardless of receiving any. In the autonegotiation specification these pulses are called normal link pulses (NLP). NLPs used by autonegotiation are still unipolar, positive only, and with a nominal duration of 100; but each LIT is replaced by a pulse burst consisting of 17 to 33 pulses sent 125 apart. Each pulse burst is called a fast link pulse (FLP) burst. The time interval between the start of each FLP burst is the same 16 as between NLPs. The FLP burst consists of 17 NLP at a 125 time interval with a tolerance of 14. Between each pair of two consecutive NLPs (i. e. at 62.5 after first NLP of the pulse pair) an additional positive pulse may be present. The presence of this additional pulse indicates a logical 1, its absence a logical 0. As a result, every FLP contains a 16 bit data word. This data word is called a link code word (LCW). The bits of the LCW are numbered from 0 to 15, where bit 0 corresponds to the first possible pulse in time and bit 15 to the last.

A duplex mismatch occurs when two connected devices are configured in different duplex modes. This may happen, for example, if one is configured for autonegotiation while the other one has a fixed mode of operation that is full duplex (no autonegotiation). In such conditions, the autonegotiation device correctly detects the speed of operation, but is unable to correctly detect the duplex mode. As a result, it sets the correct speed but assumes half duplex mode. When a device is operating in full duplex while the other one operates in half duplex, the connection works reliably only at a very low throughput. A full duplex device may transmit data while it is receiving. However, if the half duplex device receives data while it is sending, it senses a collision and aborts transmission and then attempts to resend the frame. The full duplex device will report frame check sequence (FCS) errors on the aborted transmissions. Depending on timing, the half duplex device may sense a late collision, which it will interpret as a hard error rather than a normal consequence of CSMA/CD and may not attempt to resend the frame. The full duplex device does not detect any collision and assumes the frame was received without error. This combination of (late) collisions reported at the half duplex end and FCS errors reported by the full duplex end are indicators that a duplex mismatch is present.