(Apologies if double post, sent this earlier, but it hasnt shown up)
Hi everyone, First real look at an ASR920 (Historically we have used ME3600's for this role...cust VRFs etc) - Now, I see the ASR920 is definitely "different" to the ME3600....ie. no "switchport" commands.....more like a router.. So; On an ME3600, we would have a dot1q trunk coming from an edge L2 switch tagging customer vlans, on the ME3600 port, we would have: interface GigabitEthernet0/4 description DOT1QTRUNK_TO_EDGE_SWITCH_FOO switchport trunk allowed vlan none switchport mode trunk load-interval 30 no cdp enable service instance 15 ethernet description MANAGEMENT_INT_FOR_TORSW encapsulation dot1q 15 rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric bridge-domain 15 Then a vlan int (15) with L3 On the ASR920, we cannot do this....in the same way... So, we can use BDI ints, or the old dot1q subints... bdi example...hopefully correct ?? int gi0/0/23 description DOT1QTRUNK_TO_EDGE_SWITCH_FOO service instance 15 ethernet description MANAGEMENT_INT_FOR_TORSW encapsulation dot1q 15 rewrite ingress tag pop 1 symmetric bridge-domain 15 Then a BDI int (15) with L3 Would the above be correct? And if so, are there any major limitations (QOS for example) that anyone is aware of when using BDI vs the old dot1q subint? (On our ASR1001's, we initially used BDI Ints, but found netflow did not work "correctly", so swapped back to dot1q subints) Cheers _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/