per-VLAN STP maybe?
Andy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gareth Hinton"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, May 09, 2001 9:45 PM
Subject: Re: Encapsulation V-LAN [7:3798]
> I would say use dot1q everywhere.
> ISL will disappear at some point in the future. Big overheads compared to
> dot1q.
> Anybody have any valid reasons to stay with ISL?
>
> Gaz
>
> ""carmelo Garofalo"" wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Hi Guys,
> > i have a question for you.
> >
> > In my site i have to project a new network architecture.
> >
> > I would organize the Resource human in V-LAN. Of course all V-LAN have
to
> > access some services (example DNS, E-Mail, Domain Controller etc. etc)
and
> > not others.
> >
> > The NIC interfaces of my servers permit the 802.1Q encapsulation.
> >
> > I would make the TRUNK between switches (Catalyst 4000 - access Layer
and
> > Catalyst 6500 -Core Layer) with ISL trunk.
> >
> > Can i map the 802.1Q trunk on ISL trunk? And how could i do this ?
> >
> > Please indicate me link where i can find a example of this configuration
?
> >
> > Regards, Carmelo
> > FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> > Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
> Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=3925&t=3798
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
