Correct, The 2 lans across the wan are nothing more than 2 networks with layer 3 router connections connecting them together. The vlan's are only significant at the local lan level to the host in the switch.
Larry Thomas N. wrote: >Hi Larry, > >I am using trunking on the LAN side of the routers to route between VLANs. >However, WAN interfaces of these routers are not configured as trunk. The >WAN link is just connected using a different subnet. And no, I don't use >bridging. So if VLAN is just local significant, should it not be a problem? >Thanks! > >Thomas > > >""Larry Letterman"" wrote in message >[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > >>I would think that you can bridge them with IRB/CRB but the vlan id >>would not be >>an issue since the connections are not using isl/dot1q trunking. You >>would basically >>be making a flat network across the wan links. The vlan information >>will only propagate >>across trunk links that pass the vlan id in the layer 2 frame. >> >>-Larry >> >>s vermill wrote: >> >>>Larry Letterman wrote: >>> >>>>Not unless the routers were using trunking and it does not >>>>sound like >>>>they are... >>>>The L3 links to each lan switch dont know anything about the >>>>vlan . >>>> >>>>Larry >>>> >>>Larry, >>> >>>Just curious... Can VLANs be bridged over a bridge group that includes >>>serial WAN connectivity or is a FE or GE trunk the only possibility? >>> >>>Scott Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=58646&t=58559 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
