RE: Trunking ISL and 802.1Q on the same Interface [7:74197]
No you don't (have a couple of VLANs, some with ISL and others with 802.1q). The trunking protocol is not an attribute of a VLAN, it is an attribute of a physical (trunking) port. You have some VLANs, put them on whatever trunk port you desire. Fred Reimer - CCNA Eclipsys Corporation, 200 Ashford Center North, Atlanta, GA 30338 Phone: 404-847-5177 Cell: 770-490-3071 Pager: 888-260-2050 NOTICE; This email contains confidential or proprietary information which may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the named recipient(s). If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected the email, please notify the author by replying to this message. If you are not the named recipient, you are not authorized to use, disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email, and should immediately delete it from your computer. -Original Message- From: johnman johnman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 2:50 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Trunking ISL and 802.1Q on the same Interface [7:74197] Have couple of VLAN some with ISL and other with 802.1Q. Can I trunk all of them (ISL and 802.1Q) on one physical fastethernet on my 2620 router ? _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=74201t=74197 -- **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Re: Trunking ISL and 802.1Q on the same Interface [7:74197]
johnman johnman wrote: Have couple of VLAN some with ISL and other with 802.1Q. Can I trunk all of them (ISL and 802.1Q) on one physical fastethernet on my 2620 router ? VLANs don't run trunk encapsulations, trunks do so I don't understand your question. The trunk encap is how trunks label, (tag) VLANs. If you mean can you run either or both encap types on the same switch then yes you can. Bot no you can't encap ISL and 802.1Q on the same trunk. Dave _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html -- David Madland CCIE# 2016 Sr. Network Engineer Qwest Communications 612-664-3367 Government can do something for the people only in proportion as it can do something to the people. -- Thomas Jefferson Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=74199t=74197 -- **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
RE: Trunking ISL and 802.1Q on the same Interface [7:74197]
No you don't (have a couple of VLANs, some with ISL and others with 802.1q). The trunking protocol is not an attribute of a VLAN, it is an attribute of a physical (trunking) port. You have some VLANs, put them on whatever trunk port you desire. Fred Reimer - CCNA Eclipsys Corporation, 200 Ashford Center North, Atlanta, GA 30338 Phone: 404-847-5177 Cell: 770-490-3071 Pager: 888-260-2050 NOTICE; This email contains confidential or proprietary information which may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the named recipient(s). If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected the email, please notify the author by replying to this message. If you are not the named recipient, you are not authorized to use, disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email, and should immediately delete it from your computer. -Original Message- From: johnman johnman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2003 2:50 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Trunking ISL and 802.1Q on the same Interface [7:74197] Have couple of VLAN some with ISL and other with 802.1Q. Can I trunk all of them (ISL and 802.1Q) on one physical fastethernet on my 2620 router ? _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=74235t=74197 -- **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Re: Trunking ISL and 802.1Q on the same Interface [7:74197]
johnman johnman wrote: Have couple of VLAN some with ISL and other with 802.1Q. Can I trunk all of them (ISL and 802.1Q) on one physical fastethernet on my 2620 router ? VLANs don't run trunk encapsulations, trunks do so I don't understand your question. The trunk encap is how trunks label, (tag) VLANs. If you mean can you run either or both encap types on the same switch then yes you can. Bot no you can't encap ISL and 802.1Q on the same trunk. Dave _ Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html -- David Madland CCIE# 2016 Sr. Network Engineer Qwest Communications 612-664-3367 Government can do something for the people only in proportion as it can do something to the people. -- Thomas Jefferson **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=74246t=74197 -- **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
RE: Trunking ISl and 802.1q [7:74059]
How much or how did you pick up a 3550? I thought they were so expensive? Please do tell... Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=74066t=74059 -- **Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store: http://shop.groupstudy.com FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
RE: Trunking ISl and 802.1q [7:74059]
They are very expensive! I was able to get one through our purchase of an
AVVID solution at work. I got it for training and I can run home and get it
for a hot spare if needed. I was told if I get my CCNP and Voice Specialist
I could have it so...
We did get these at a very good price. CISCO was really pushing to install
the IPCC over the AVAYA 3Com solutions we where looking at. I just hope
we did not jump in over our heads. But anything has to be better then the
old ROLM we had.
~Paul~
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2003 1:42 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Trunking ISl and 802.1q [7:74059]
How much or how did you pick up a 3550? I thought they were so expensive?
Please do tell...
**Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store:
http://shop.groupstudy.com
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info:
http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
---
{This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus/McAfee}
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=74088t=74059
--
**Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store:
http://shop.groupstudy.com
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
RE: Trunking ISl and 802.1q [7:74059]
Hello,
Kind of confused on switch types and trunking.
Do I understand correctly that WS-c2950X can not do ISL?
And that WS-C2912-XL-EN can?
Can 19xx do ISL or 802.1q?
I am going of this link
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk389/tk390/technologies_configuration_examp
le09186a00800949fd.shtml
Can some point me to a 1900 link? I can seem to fine a good one. Or
anything else that might help. I like to try and figure this stuff out
instead of being hand feed but I am stumped. Maybe I need to walk away I
have been at it all day. :)
I am trying to finish putting my lab together and need to know to finish
purchasing the switches.
Also how many makes a good lab? Or do I need any more? How many are good to
have for practicing SPT and trunking.
I currently have
1-3550 (this the new PoE type)
1-1912 (enterprise edition)
1- 1201 (not sure if this good for much)
I have the chance to get 2 WS-C2912-XL-EN and am not sure if I need both or
just one.
---
{This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus/McAfee}
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=74059t=74059
--
**Please support GroupStudy by purchasing from the GroupStudy Store:
http://shop.groupstudy.com
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
RE: TRUNKING MODES [7:70700]
Hi, Mwalie yes, the trunk link can be established even if between different VTP domain, the following is the detailed explaination. A trunk link can be negotiated between two switches only if both switches belong to the same VLAN Trunking Protocol (VTP) management domain. If the two switches are in different VTP domains and trunking is desired between them, the trunk links must be set to on or nonegotiate mode. This setting will force the trunk to be established. Mwalie W wrote: Hi All, Here is a question, please. Accidentally two switches are connected together that are in different management domains. If both sides of the link have their trunking states set to on, what will the link do? I thought there will be no trunking, but the answer says they will trunk - even with different management domains? Thanks. Mwalie Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=70705t=70700 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: TRUNKING MODES [7:70700]
Hi Grant, Thanks. That is very useful because I was really getting mixed - just the state of mind I should not be in as I prepare for BCMSN 640-604 next week. That is very useful, believe me. Cheers! Mwalie Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=70708t=70700 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking on C2924-XL [7:62881]
Richard, Trunking is only supported in the enterprise image release. You do not have that image From: Richard Burdette Reply-To: Richard Burdette To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Trunking on C2924-XL [7:62881] Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 16:41:19 GMT Hello All, I'm attempting to configure trunking on a C2924-XL switch runiing IOS version Version 11.2(8.10)SA6 from file c2900XL-hs-mz-112.8.10-SA6.bin. I've read CCO enough to realize that the command under interface configuration mode would be switchport mode trunk. However, the switch does not accept that command and executing switchport mode ? only show two options, access and multi, not trunk. I'd appreciate anyone letting me in on why I cannot select trunk when it ought to be there. Thank you very much. misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62886t=62881 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking on C2924-XL [7:62880]
In mail.net.groupstudy.pro, you wrote: I'm attempting to configure trunking on a C2924-XL switch runiing IOS version Version 11.2(8.10)SA6 from file c2900XL-hs-mz-112.8.10 SA6.bin. I've read CCO enough to realize that the command under interface configuration mode would be switchport mode trunk. However, the switch does not accept that command and executing switchport mode ? only show two options, access If the switch really is a WS-C2924-XL, ie. an original 2900XL switch, trunking isn't supported at all. You need a WS-C2924-XL-EN. // kaj Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=62900t=62880 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking over ethernet [7:57539]
- Original Message - From: pauldongso To: Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2002 2:17 PM Subject: trunking over ethernet [7:57539] Hi Paul, Does ethernet interface support trunking? (isl and dot1.q, or just one of those)? The reason for asking is all the doco i ever read only say cisco supports trunking on both fast ethernet and gigabit ethernet switch links, as well as aggregated fast ang gigabit etherchannel links Sounds like trunking over ethernet is not supported. Cisco states that you need to have a FastEthernet (100 Mb/s) or above to support trunking. Hence, trunking on Ethernet (10 Mb/s) interface is not supported. However, if you have only e.g. 2 VLANs and wish to route traffic between them, you can use a router with 2*10 Mbps interface and it will still work. But if you have 10 VLANs then it would be better to get a router with 100 Mbps support and perform trunking with the switch. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=57546t=57539 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking over ethernet [7:57539]
On the 2611 platform, VLAN encapsulation is supported for Ethernet as of 12.1. Bridging on a subinterface is not supported until 12.2, however. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=57547t=57539 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking over ethernet [7:57539]
dot1q on ethernet was added in IOS 12.0(1)T and the native keyword was added in 12.1(3)T. Before that, had to put the native VLAN cfg on the main/physical interface. --- Doug Oh wrote: On the 2611 platform, VLAN encapsulation is supported for Ethernet as of 12.1. Bridging on a subinterface is not supported until 12.2, however. __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=57552t=57539 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833]
yes Michael Bray wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Anyone know if you can pass 802.1q over Aironet bridges? -mdb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=42836t=42833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833]
yes, you must change the default frame size on the ethernet side of both bridges to 1522 (default 1518). As far as the radio is concern it will pass the frames out over the wireless. You will need a switch on the other end of the bridge to recieve the frames and break out the vlans. - Original Message - From: Steven A. Ridder To: Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 1:30 PM Subject: Re: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833] yes Michael Bray wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Anyone know if you can pass 802.1q over Aironet bridges? -mdb [EMAIL PROTECTED] The new Saturn ION was launched in New York. See pics of the car and the party on CollegeClub.com! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=42839t=42833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833]
yes, you must change the default frame size on the ethernet side of both bridges to 1522 (default 1518). As far as the radio is concern it will pass the frames out over the wireless. You will need a switch on the other end of the bridge to recieve the frames and break out the vlans. That would be required for ISL, but 802.1q should go with no changes? Marko. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=42843t=42833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833]
Marko Milivojevic wrote: yes, you must change the default frame size on the ethernet side of both bridges to 1522 (default 1518). As far as the radio is That would be required for ISL, but 802.1q should go with no changes? Nope, that's for 802.1Q. ISL has a 27-byte header. Regards, Marco. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=42846t=42833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833]
- Original Message - From: Marko Milivojevic To: Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 4:24 PM Subject: RE: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833] yes, you must change the default frame size on the ethernet side of both bridges to 1522 (default 1518). As far as the radio is concern it will pass the frames out over the wireless. You will need a switch on the other end of the bridge to recieve the frames and break out the vlans. That would be required for ISL, but 802.1q should go with no changes? Marko. An 802.1q frame size is modified with a 4 byte field that is inserted between the SA and the type or length field. Therefore the max frame size is 1522. The 340 series connect to the lan @ 10BaseT therfore they could not be connected to a trunkport. The 350 series bridges can connect @ 10/100 BaseT therefore they can be connected to a Trunk Port. 802.1q can be carried over access and trunk links. ISL can only be carried over a trunk link. The trunk port on both switches will need to be set to nonegotiate This is assuming you are connecting to a 350 series bridge. The new Saturn ION was launched in New York. See pics of the car and the party on CollegeClub.com! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=42856t=42833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833]
Actually, 802.1q adds four bytes, ISL encapsulation makes the frame much larger (by 30 bytes) I so the increase from 1518 to 1522 would make sense for dot1q and an increase from 1518 to 1548 would be needed for ISL (if it's even supported on the 802.11 stuff, but I can't speak on that). Mike W. Marko Milivojevic wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... yes, you must change the default frame size on the ethernet side of both bridges to 1522 (default 1518). As far as the radio is concern it will pass the frames out over the wireless. You will need a switch on the other end of the bridge to recieve the frames and break out the vlans. That would be required for ISL, but 802.1q should go with no changes? Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=42857t=42833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833]
An ISL frame can be as big as 1518 + 30 = 1548 bytes. The original frame is encapsulated in a 26-byte header and a 4-byte CRC. An 802.1Q frame can be as big as 1522 bytes. 802.1Q inserts a 4-byte header immediately the destination and source MAC addresses (and source-routing information, if present) of the frame to be transmitted, which could have already been 1518 bytes. Priscilla At 05:24 PM 4/29/02, Marko Milivojevic wrote: yes, you must change the default frame size on the ethernet side of both bridges to 1522 (default 1518). As far as the radio is concern it will pass the frames out over the wireless. You will need a switch on the other end of the bridge to recieve the frames and break out the vlans. That would be required for ISL, but 802.1q should go with no changes? Marko. Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=42862t=42833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833]
I agree. Change the MTU on the bridges. I have a customer with 5 remote sites connected via 802.11b and trunking across all 5 and I have to increase the MTU. What I would love to see is an update to the Aironet code that supports the actual trunking header so my bridge management interfaces could be on a non-native VLAN. I tend to make the native VLAN (Dot1Q) the most active VLAN and not the default VLAN 1. Unfortunately, in this scenario, the bridges won't communicate in VLAN 1 as these frames will be tagged and the bridges don't understand the tags. Maybe some day... Rik -Original Message- From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, April 29, 2002 9:19 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Trunking over Aironet bridge? [7:42833] An ISL frame can be as big as 1518 + 30 = 1548 bytes. The original frame is encapsulated in a 26-byte header and a 4-byte CRC. An 802.1Q frame can be as big as 1522 bytes. 802.1Q inserts a 4-byte header immediately the destination and source MAC addresses (and source-routing information, if present) of the frame to be transmitted, which could have already been 1518 bytes. Priscilla At 05:24 PM 4/29/02, Marko Milivojevic wrote: yes, you must change the default frame size on the ethernet side of both bridges to 1522 (default 1518). As far as the radio is concern it will pass the frames out over the wireless. You will need a switch on the other end of the bridge to recieve the frames and break out the vlans. That would be required for ISL, but 802.1q should go with no changes? Marko. Priscilla Oppenheimer http://www.priscilla.com Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=42872t=42833 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trunking multiple subnets on the same vlan /port [7:34975]
Try putting one subnet on each subinterface - each in turn will map to a
vlan. Trunk all the vlans to the switch. On the interfaces where you want
multiple vlans try configuring switchport multi vlan {ADD vlan-list |
REMOVE vlan-list} Valid IDs are from 1 to 1001. Separate nonconsecutive VLAN
IDs with a comma and no spaces; use a hyphen to designate a range of IDs. Do
not enter leading zeros.
Let us know if this works.
-Original Message-
From: McHugh Randy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 1:45 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Trunking multiple subnets on the same vlan /port [7:34975]
I have 15 different subnets on a eth 0/0 on a 2621 router
with 15 secondary
addresses . I want to know if it is possible to change them
to subinterfaces
and trunk more than one subnet accross a 2924 switch and pust
more than one
subnet in the same vlan/port. That means putting more than
one subnet on one
port in the same vlan. The subnets could be contiguous.
For instance:
ip address 64.41.x.241 255.255.255.248 secondary
ip address 64.41.x.249 255.255.255.248 secondary
Or most are discontiguous.
I did not think it could be done but just wanted to throw it
out there to
see if anyone had a solution.
Thanks,
randy
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=35001t=34975
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking - VLANS - with NORTEL switch [7:27255]
Hamid, how far are you with the VLAN configuration on your BayStack 450 ? Use the 4VLAN Configuration Menu4 and the 4VLAN Port Configuration Menu4 to create VLANs and to add ports. Use the 4Multilink Trunk Configuration Menu4 to create trunks. The BayStack supports 802.1q trunking only, so you4ll have to use that on your Cisco router as well. Let me know if you need any more specific help. Below is a link to the BayStack 450 User Guide, which contains all the configuration information you need in detail: http://www25.nortelnetworks.com/library/tpubs/pdf/switches/bstack/450/02401A00.PDF Regards, Hans From: Hamid Reply-To: Hamid To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Trunking - VLANS - with NORTEL switch [7:27255] Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 00:57:07 -0500 Hi group In my network I have a CISCO 3600 Router and a NORTEL Baystack 450 switch. its a manageble switch. I want to make VLAN and a make this switch VLANs oprate as routers's FastEthernet subinterfaces. I have do it with CATALYST 2924 switches. I made some VLANS and my router's FastEthernet port on switch use TRUNk protocol to route between VLANS. I want to use TRUNK protocol on Nortel switch but I dont know how. I asked the NORTEL support but they have not answer. please help me. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=27268t=27255 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking - VLANS - with NORTEL switch [7:27255]
Hi, You're going to need to use 802.1Q. This is from memory so may not be exactly correct. Don't have access to a 450 at moment. On the 450, you configure the port to be a tagged port. You can do this through the console/telnet interface or through Device Manager (free download from Nortel). There should be some options to tell it what VLANs to put on trunk, but by default I believe its all. If you need help on Cisco side, feel free to ask. I'm presuming you have that side under control. Note: The Trunking feature on the 450 (MLT) is not VLAN trunking so don't get confused with those options. Also check this URL: http://www25.nortelnetworks.com/library/tpubs/pdf/switches/bstack/450/304935B.PDF HTH, Erick NNCSE, CCNP-Security --- Hamid wrote: Hi group In my network I have a CISCO 3600 Router and a NORTEL Baystack 450 switch. its a manageble switch. I want to make VLAN and a make this switch VLANs oprate as routers's FastEthernet subinterfaces. I have do it with CATALYST 2924 switches. I made some VLANS and my router's FastEthernet port on switch use TRUNk protocol to route between VLANS. I want to use TRUNK protocol on Nortel switch but I dont know how. I asked the NORTEL support but they have not answer. please help me. __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting, just $8.95/month. http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1 Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=27261t=27255 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking VLANs from Router to switch - Wheres [7:24887]
(In an Elvis voice)... Thank you.. Thank you very much! =) Mike W. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=24980t=24887 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trunking VLANs from Router to switch - Wheres the [7:24887]
You are correct. The traffic will flow from the client on VLAN A, across the trunk to the router, get routed, come back across the trunk to the switch then to the client in VLAN B. I know I'll probably get hammered for saying this because it's not *required* to work, but for the most part, you want to have each VLAN representing a separate TCP/IP subnet, and therefore the traffic needs to hit the router anyway to get routed between subnets. Does only the initial setup of the conversation go through the router and the actual traffic flow across the backplane of the switch? The answer to this is no. However, if your switch and router are capable, you can configure MultiLayer Switching (MLS). In multilayer switching the switch keeps a cache called the MLS cache. In this cache is kept information about TCP/IP flows. A flow is a unidirectional communication between two hosts (you can change what the switch considers a flow, but we won't get into that). If the switch and router in your scenario you laid out are both setup with multilayer switching, here's what would happen: 1) Client A (on VLAN A) would send a packet to Client B (on VLAN B). 2) The switch would get the packet, examine source/destination address and see if it was in the MLS cache. (if it finds it, then jump to step 7) 3) The switch makes a partial MLS cache entry using the info from the packet and sends to the router for routing. 4) The router routes the packet, rewriting Layer 2 info as needed, and sends back to the switch. 5) The switch gets the packet back, uses new dest layer 2 address to look in the CAM and decide which switchport to forward the packet. 6) It uses the newly rewritten layer 2 info from the packet and the destination (outgoing) switchport and completes the MLS cache entry. 7) It forwards the packet out the proper switchport. So as you can see, with MLS configured, the first packet is routed by the router, then all packets after that in that flow have their layer 2 info rewritten by the switch from the info in the MLS cache and are switched to the proper outgoing port without ever going to the router again, thus they call this route once, switch many. Hope this helps! Mike W. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=24890t=24887 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trunking VLANs from Router to switch - Wheres [7:24887]
could complete MLS feature, the lowest hardware configuration and IOS requirement. thank you. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=24897t=24887 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trunking VLANs from Router to switch - Wheres [7:24887]
Check out this URL (careful of wrap) http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/473/55.html Mike W. Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=24901t=24887 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Trunking VLANs from Router to switch - Wheres the [7:24887]
Mike, Funny that this topic came up tonight. I am taking the BCMSN test in the morning and was just reading about trunking multiple VLANs to one router interface. Excellent answer. Brad Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=24916t=24887 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: trunking [7:6123]
ISL is Cisco proprietary. 802.1Q is an open standard so that would be the way to connect the boxes. Check out Cisco LAN Switching by Clark and Hamilton. -Original Message- From: SH Wesson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 12:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking [7:6123] My environment is currently running Cabletron equipment that has trunking set to 802.1q. I'm putting in a new Catalyst 6500 switch and will be tieing that into the Cabletron network. My question is, since I'm not going to trunk between the two but just to have a cross connect to communicate between the two networks, should I be using ISL trunking on the Cisco switch or should I be using 802.1q so that it is compatible with the Cabletron network. In addition, if I do use 802.1q trunking, will that mess up the Cabltron side. Thanks. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com 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=7i=6128t=6123 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: trunking [7:6123]
Cabletron doesnt support ISL so you would have to do dot1q --- Daniel Cotts wrote: ISL is Cisco proprietary. 802.1Q is an open standard so that would be the way to connect the boxes. Check out Cisco LAN Switching by Clark and Hamilton. -Original Message- From: SH Wesson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 12:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking [7:6123] My environment is currently running Cabletron equipment that has trunking set to 802.1q. I'm putting in a new Catalyst 6500 switch and will be tieing that into the Cabletron network. My question is, since I'm not going to trunk between the two but just to have a cross connect to communicate between the two networks, should I be using ISL trunking on the Cisco switch or should I be using 802.1q so that it is compatible with the Cabletron network. In addition, if I do use 802.1q trunking, will that mess up the Cabltron side. Thanks. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com 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] = Spencer Plantier Lan Engineer Voice 919-474-1300 ext 0873 Cell 919-696-8848 __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/ Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=6129t=6123 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking [7:6123]
If the cabletron thing is compliant with the IEEE spec, which only specifies one instance of STP on a trunk, you will need to configure (or just be aware) of PVST+'s existence. - Original Message - From: Daniel Cotts To: Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 1:30 PM Subject: RE: trunking [7:6123] ISL is Cisco proprietary. 802.1Q is an open standard so that would be the way to connect the boxes. Check out Cisco LAN Switching by Clark and Hamilton. -Original Message- From: SH Wesson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 12:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking [7:6123] My environment is currently running Cabletron equipment that has trunking set to 802.1q. I'm putting in a new Catalyst 6500 switch and will be tieing that into the Cabletron network. My question is, since I'm not going to trunk between the two but just to have a cross connect to communicate between the two networks, should I be using ISL trunking on the Cisco switch or should I be using 802.1q so that it is compatible with the Cabletron network. In addition, if I do use 802.1q trunking, will that mess up the Cabltron side. Thanks. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com 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=7i=6131t=6123 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking [7:6123]
I actually did this a few months back and it worked fine... although you will get speed and duplex errors on the 6500 even if they're manually set (at least with the Cabletron 9000 series switch). It didn't have any ill results so no big deal. Jeff SH Wesson wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... My environment is currently running Cabletron equipment that has trunking set to 802.1q. I'm putting in a new Catalyst 6500 switch and will be tieing that into the Cabletron network. My question is, since I'm not going to trunk between the two but just to have a cross connect to communicate between the two networks, should I be using ISL trunking on the Cisco switch or should I be using 802.1q so that it is compatible with the Cabletron network. In addition, if I do use 802.1q trunking, will that mess up the Cabltron side. Thanks. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com 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=7i=6145t=6123 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking [7:6123]
You mention in your post that you will not be running trunks between the two boxes. If that's the case, there is no need to go with 802.1q for the 6500. There was a thread a week or so ago which discussed the pro's and cons of ISL and 802.1q. I think the main one for ISL was per VLAN spanning tree. I think the main ones for 802.1q are much less overheads, and an open standard. Regards, Gaz Peter I. Slow wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... If the cabletron thing is compliant with the IEEE spec, which only specifies one instance of STP on a trunk, you will need to configure (or just be aware) of PVST+'s existence. - Original Message - From: Daniel Cotts To: Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 1:30 PM Subject: RE: trunking [7:6123] ISL is Cisco proprietary. 802.1Q is an open standard so that would be the way to connect the boxes. Check out Cisco LAN Switching by Clark and Hamilton. -Original Message- From: SH Wesson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 12:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking [7:6123] My environment is currently running Cabletron equipment that has trunking set to 802.1q. I'm putting in a new Catalyst 6500 switch and will be tieing that into the Cabletron network. My question is, since I'm not going to trunk between the two but just to have a cross connect to communicate between the two networks, should I be using ISL trunking on the Cisco switch or should I be using 802.1q so that it is compatible with the Cabletron network. In addition, if I do use 802.1q trunking, will that mess up the Cabltron side. Thanks. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com 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] 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=7i=6146t=6123 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking [7:6123]
Ya know. that really sux that Cisco would abandon ISL. Not because it's the best but alot of people have built networks that utilize ISL because it is better than Dot1Q, and not giving those people a graceful way to change is really low down. That's what happens when you trust proprietary Cisco standards, EVEN IF they're better... Hope they don't drop support for HSRP... Rik Guyler wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Hmmm...if you're not going to trunk VLANs between the 2, why setup trunking at all? By adding the trunking, you will incur additional overhead that's just not necessary unless needed. ISL is Cisco proprietary. However, they have tweaked Dot1Q and are now moving away from ISL. Some of the newer boxes (Cat 4K for instance) don't support ISL with the latest CatOS. If you do have to setup trunking, I would use Dot1Q. I don't know what you mean by a cross connect to communicate between the two networks. Do you have seperate VLANs or Layer 3 subnets in place? If so, then you will also need some form of routing in place. Otherwise, I wouldn't setup any trunking and just connect them! Rik -Original Message- From: SH Wesson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, May 28, 2001 1:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking [7:6123] My environment is currently running Cabletron equipment that has trunking set to 802.1q. I'm putting in a new Catalyst 6500 switch and will be tieing that into the Cabletron network. My question is, since I'm not going to trunk between the two but just to have a cross connect to communicate between the two networks, should I be using ISL trunking on the Cisco switch or should I be using 802.1q so that it is compatible with the Cabletron network. In addition, if I do use 802.1q trunking, will that mess up the Cabltron side. Thanks. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com 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=7i=6173t=6123 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: trunking [7:1098]
I would look at the spannig tree state when the 2nd Linux server comes up. I am not a Linux expert, but it sounds like it may be running spanning tree instance that is causing the 3512's gig port to go into blocking mode. Does the Linux server have more than one NIC? Just a thought. __ Thomas Crowe Technical Director Research Development CTS - Atlanta Phone: 770-664-3900 ext 45 __ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 11:53 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking [7:1098] We have a 3512 switching dot1q trunking to a 5500. The 3512 has a linux server attached to the 3512 on a vlan. We have another linux server attached to the 5500 on the same vlan. The linux server on then 5500 works fine until the 3512 linux server comes up and then we lose connectivity to 5500 linux server. We cannot ping either box when they are both connected. In a quick fix we took off the trunking and put both gig port on the same vlan and now it works fine. Any thoughts why trunking causes a problem. Thanks Wm. Spencer Plantier LAN Engineer (919) 474-1300 ext 0873 Office (919) 474-1056 Fax (919)696-8848 Cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] [GroupStudy.com removed an attachment of type text/x-vcard which had a name of Thomas Crowe.vcf] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7i=1122t=1098 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking [7:1098]
Can you see the MAC addresses on each switch? can you see ARP entries on any attached devices? What VLAN permissioning do you have on the trunks? can you post configs? Andy - Original Message - From: "Plantier, William (Spencer)" To: Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2001 4:52 PM Subject: trunking [7:1098] We have a 3512 switching dot1q trunking to a 5500. The 3512 has a linux server attached to the 3512 on a vlan. We have another linux server attached to the 5500 on the same vlan. The linux server on then 5500 works fine until the 3512 linux server comes up and then we lose connectivity to 5500 linux server. We cannot ping either box when they are both connected. In a quick fix we took off the trunking and put both gig port on the same vlan and now it works fine. Any thoughts why trunking causes a problem. Thanks Wm. Spencer Plantier LAN Engineer (919) 474-1300 ext 0873 Office (919) 474-1056 Fax (919)696-8848 Cell [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=7i=1153t=1098 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: trunking modes [7:902]
Table 12-1: Fast Ethernet and Gigabit Ethernet Trunking Modes Mode Function on Puts the port into permanent trunking mode and negotiates to convert the link into a trunk link. The port becomes a trunk port even if the neighboring port does not agree to the change. off Puts the port into permanent nontrunking mode and negotiates to convert the link into a nontrunk link. The port becomes a nontrunk port even if the neighboring port does not agree to the change. desirable Makes the port actively attempt to convert the link to a trunk link. The port becomes a trunk port if the neighboring port is set to on, desirable, or auto mode. auto Makes the port willing to convert the link to a trunk link. The port becomes a trunk port if the neighboring port is set to on or desirable mode. This is the default mode for Fast and Gigabit Ethernet ports. nonegotiate Puts the port into permanent trunking mode but prevents the port from generating DTP frames. You must configure the neighboring port manually as a trunk port to establish a trunk link. from my readings, "Desirable" is the best option to use for interoperability. Although ON should be equally effective in forcing the link into "Trunking" mode. Auto is OK, if one side is set to ON or Auto, but would be better switched to desirable on those ports which are part of a trunk group. http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/cat5000/rel_5_2/config/e _trunk.htm (Watch for Wrap) Ken Claussen MCSE CCNA CCA [EMAIL PROTECTED] "The Mind is a Terrible thing to Waste!" -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Lopez, Robert Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 9:54 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking modes [7:902] Is there any "rule of thumb" when it comes to determining which trunking mode to use. I'm in an environment where about a dozen trunks exist between 4 6509's. The trunking modes have been set using "on", "desirable" and "auto". Is there any need to have them uniform in appearance? For example, one side of the link "desirable", the other side "auto". From what I'm reading, I'm thinking since these 6509's are in the core of our network, the setting should be to "on" throughout. Any suggestions? TIA! Robert Robert M. Lopez Network Planning Ann Arbor Data Center Pfizer Global Research Development Phone 734-622-3948 Fax 734-622-1690 "There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle." ...Albert Einstein 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=7i=923t=902 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking modes [7:902]
If you want a port to be a trunk then set it to ON, if not then set it to OFF. There is a procedure to negociate the mode - hence the auto/desirable options, but why not hard code it down? Just one less thing to go wrong... Andy - Original Message - From: "Lopez, Robert" To: Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 2:54 PM Subject: trunking modes [7:902] Is there any "rule of thumb" when it comes to determining which trunking mode to use. I'm in an environment where about a dozen trunks exist between 4 6509's. The trunking modes have been set using "on", "desirable" and "auto". Is there any need to have them uniform in appearance? For example, one side of the link "desirable", the other side "auto". From what I'm reading, I'm thinking since these 6509's are in the core of our network, the setting should be to "on" throughout. Any suggestions? TIA! Robert Robert M. Lopez Network Planning Ann Arbor Data Center Pfizer Global Research Development Phone 734-622-3948 Fax 734-622-1690 "There are only two ways to live your life. One is as though nothing is a miracle. The other is as though everything is a miracle." ...Albert Einstein 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=7i=929t=902 -- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking
802.1q doesn't support multiple spanning trees, but many vendors have added their own support which may or may not interoperate well with other vendors. YMMV. 802.1s will which is at draft 9 (march 9 2001). To my knowledge, I don't know of any vendors with support for it at this time in it's draft form nor do I know how different it is from PVST, etc. --- "Brant I. Stevens" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This may seem like nit-picking, but it isn't actually a revision of 802.1Q that supports PVST, but rather, the vendor gear that supports PVST with the use of 802.1Q... Nortel Passport (Accelar) switches support this as well... -Brant Rik wrote: Actually, most newer revisions of Dot1Q support PVST as well. Rik ""ciscosis"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 001301c0b3b7$aba8b000$593d839b@nes2s50667">news:001301c0b3b7$aba8b000$593d839b@nes2s50667... ISL has a number of advantages over dot1q, for example it supports per vlan spanning tree (PVST) which allows a separate spantree instance per Vlan which makes networks more scalable and more stable than dot1q based. It is Cisco proprietary but it interoperates with dot1q (common spanning tree) compliant switches (using Cisco protocol PVST+) If you are building a large cisco switched network with alot of Vlans and are worried about issues such as spanning tree convergence/ stability /reliability .. definately go for ISL __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking
Another issue to consider is the fact that if IP telephony will ever be implemented (Cisco's anyway), dot1q trunking has to be used, negating the use of ISL. A recent implementation has emerged called MISTP (Multiple Instance STP) that supposedly supports multiple spanning trees over the dot1q protocol. Does it work in an IP telephony environment? I leave that up to someone more qualified to answer. Vijay Ramcharan - Original Message - From: "Erick B." [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: "Brant I. Stevens" [EMAIL PROTECTED]; "Rik" [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2001 3:28 AM Subject: Re: trunking 802.1q doesn't support multiple spanning trees, but many vendors have added their own support which may or may not interoperate well with other vendors. YMMV. 802.1s will which is at draft 9 (march 9 2001). To my knowledge, I don't know of any vendors with support for it at this time in it's draft form nor do I know how different it is from PVST, etc. --- "Brant I. Stevens" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This may seem like nit-picking, but it isn't actually a revision of 802.1Q that supports PVST, but rather, the vendor gear that supports PVST with the use of 802.1Q... Nortel Passport (Accelar) switches support this as well... -Brant Rik wrote: Actually, most newer revisions of Dot1Q support PVST as well. Rik ""ciscosis"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 001301c0b3b7$aba8b000$593d839b@nes2s50667">news:001301c0b3b7$aba8b000$593d839b@nes2s50667... ISL has a number of advantages over dot1q, for example it supports per vlan spanning tree (PVST) which allows a separate spantree instance per Vlan which makes networks more scalable and more stable than dot1q based. It is Cisco proprietary but it interoperates with dot1q (common spanning tree) compliant switches (using Cisco protocol PVST+) If you are building a large cisco switched network with alot of Vlans and are worried about issues such as spanning tree convergence/ stability /reliability .. definately go for ISL __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking
This may seem like nit-picking, but it isn't actually a revision of 802.1Q that supports PVST, but rather, the vendor gear that supports PVST with the use of 802.1Q... Nortel Passport (Accelar) switches support this as well... -Brant Rik wrote: Actually, most newer revisions of Dot1Q support PVST as well. Rik ""ciscosis"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 001301c0b3b7$aba8b000$593d839b@nes2s50667">news:001301c0b3b7$aba8b000$593d839b@nes2s50667... ISL has a number of advantages over dot1q, for example it supports per vlan spanning tree (PVST) which allows a separate spantree instance per Vlan which makes networks more scalable and more stable than dot1q based. It is Cisco proprietary but it interoperates with dot1q (common spanning tree) compliant switches (using Cisco protocol PVST+) If you are building a large cisco switched network with alot of Vlans and are worried about issues such as spanning tree convergence/ stability /reliability .. definately go for ISL _ 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] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking
ISL is Cisco proprietary whereas 802.1Q is an open standard. Cisco is moving away from ISL, however. In fact, some of the newer equipment no longer supports it, such as the Cat4000 switches. Dot1Q adds less bits to the frame, but the way in which it adds them makes it somewhat less efficient. ISL adds several more bits to ends of the frame, making it easier to view the trunking info bits, but the higher number of bits makes the MTU that much higher as well. Dot1Q doesn't have such a pronounced effect on MTU as does ISL. I typically use Dot1Q these days. Knowing that Cisco is moving away from ISL and the fact that other vendor's equipment supports Dot1Q makes it a more sensible choice for future compatibility. Rik ""Lopez, Robert"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... What are the differences between isl and 802.1q trunking. If I'm in a total cisco switched environment, should I always use isl? What would be a good reason to use 802.1q? Which one is more favored over the other? Robert Robert M. Lopez Network Planning Ann Arbor Data Center Pfizer Global Research Development _ 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]
Re: trunking
As you know, 802.1q is a standard while ISL is proprietary. If you need interoperability, go with 802.1q. Even if you're all Cisco, some of Cisco's stuff doesn't support ISL. I say use whatever is available and works for you, keeping in mind that reconfiguration in the future will be necessary if you change trunk types. If that's not a big deal, I wouldn't worry about it. If it will cause a horrendous headache to have those trunks down for a minute or two while you reconfigure, then think toward the future and pick 802.1q. g I have noticed a configuration difference between the two. It was supposedly fixed in IOS 12.1(2), I think, but I've noticed this in 12.1(5) still. When using ISL, all of your VLANs are placed on subinterfaces on the router. This is because all frames coming across that trunk have an ISL tag for VLAN determination. In 802.1q, the native VLAN (VLAN 1 by default) is not tagged so you have to place the configuration for that VLAN on the major interface. All other VLANs would be on subinterfaces. Regards, John "Lopez, Robert" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3/23/01 7:57:24 AM What are the differences between isl and 802.1q trunking. If I'm in a total cisco switched environment, should I always use isl? What would be a good reason to use 802.1q? Which one is more favored over the other? Robert Robert M. Lopez Network Planning Ann Arbor Data Center Pfizer Global Research Development _ 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]
RE: trunking
John, Thanks for your insight. It looks like I will go ahead and plan a conversion to 802.1q I heard that ip telephony will not support isl as well. thanks again! Robert -Original Message- From: John Neiberger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, March 23, 2001 10:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: trunking As you know, 802.1q is a standard while ISL is proprietary. If you need interoperability, go with 802.1q. Even if you're all Cisco, some of Cisco's stuff doesn't support ISL. I say use whatever is available and works for you, keeping in mind that reconfiguration in the future will be necessary if you change trunk types. If that's not a big deal, I wouldn't worry about it. If it will cause a horrendous headache to have those trunks down for a minute or two while you reconfigure, then think toward the future and pick 802.1q. g I have noticed a configuration difference between the two. It was supposedly fixed in IOS 12.1(2), I think, but I've noticed this in 12.1(5) still. When using ISL, all of your VLANs are placed on subinterfaces on the router. This is because all frames coming across that trunk have an ISL tag for VLAN determination. In 802.1q, the native VLAN (VLAN 1 by default) is not tagged so you have to place the configuration for that VLAN on the major interface. All other VLANs would be on subinterfaces. Regards, John "Lopez, Robert" [EMAIL PROTECTED] 3/23/01 7:57:24 AM What are the differences between isl and 802.1q trunking. If I'm in a total cisco switched environment, should I always use isl? What would be a good reason to use 802.1q? Which one is more favored over the other? Robert Robert M. Lopez Network Planning Ann Arbor Data Center Pfizer Global Research Development _ 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]
Re: trunking (fwd)
I believe the main difference is that ISL supports per-VLAN Spanning Tree, and 802.1q does not. Jeff Jeff Groman IS Department, Childrens Hospital, Denver [EMAIL PROTECTED] 303 864 5671 On Fri, 23 Mar 2001, Lopez, Robert wrote: What are the differences between isl and 802.1q trunking. If I'm in a total cisco switched environment, should I always use isl? What would be a good reason to use 802.1q? Which one is more favored over the other? Robert Robert M. Lopez Network Planning Ann Arbor Data Center Pfizer Global Research Development _ 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]
Re: trunking
ISL Trunking is Cisco Proprieitary and is the perfered method if used within a completely Cisco switched fabric. 802.1q is the IEEE standard trunking protocol. The difference between the 2 is this ... ISL actually encapsulates the frames traversing the Trunk, which is to say it packages the VLAN information within another packet extending the frame size to 1522 and in a Cisco Switched Fabric, reacts faster than 802.1q because it does not carry the same load enabling 802.1q to be a standard trunking protocol. 802.1q simply adds information to the existing frame as it travels through the trunk. You would use 802.1q if you had a mixed vendor switched fabric. HTH --- "Lopez, Robert" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What are the differences between isl and 802.1q trunking. If I'm in a total cisco switched environment, should I always use isl? What would be a good reason to use 802.1q? Which one is more favored over the other? Robert Robert M. Lopez Network Planning Ann Arbor Data Center Pfizer Global Research Development _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] = Chris from Chicago MasterCNE, 5.x CNE, ICNE, 4.x CNE, CCNA, MCP __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking
ISL has a number of advantages over dot1q, for example it supports per vlan spanning tree (PVST) which allows a separate spantree instance per Vlan which makes networks more scalable and more stable than dot1q based. It is Cisco proprietary but it interoperates with dot1q (common spanning tree) compliant switches (using Cisco protocol PVST+) If you are building a large cisco switched network with alot of Vlans and are worried about issues such as spanning tree convergence/ stability /reliability .. definately go for ISL _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking
the catalyst 3548's don't either. ""Rik"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 99ftpt$p2n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:99ftpt$p2n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... ISL is Cisco proprietary whereas 802.1Q is an open standard. Cisco is moving away from ISL, however. In fact, some of the newer equipment no longer supports it, such as the Cat4000 switches. Dot1Q adds less bits to the frame, but the way in which it adds them makes it somewhat less efficient. ISL adds several more bits to ends of the frame, making it easier to view the trunking info bits, but the higher number of bits makes the MTU that much higher as well. Dot1Q doesn't have such a pronounced effect on MTU as does ISL. I typically use Dot1Q these days. Knowing that Cisco is moving away from ISL and the fact that other vendor's equipment supports Dot1Q makes it a more sensible choice for future compatibility. Rik ""Lopez, Robert"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... What are the differences between isl and 802.1q trunking. If I'm in a total cisco switched environment, should I always use isl? What would be a good reason to use 802.1q? Which one is more favored over the other? Robert Robert M. Lopez Network Planning Ann Arbor Data Center Pfizer Global Research Development _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking
All my 3548s do. And the 4000s also do wehn you add teh L3 mod to it. It's just that the lower end (no L3) don't... --- "The.Rock" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: the catalyst 3548's don't either. ""Rik"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message 99ftpt$p2n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:99ftpt$p2n$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... ISL is Cisco proprietary whereas 802.1Q is an open standard. Cisco is moving away from ISL, however. In fact, some of the newer equipment no longer supports it, such as the Cat4000 switches. Dot1Q adds less bits to the frame, but the way in which it adds them makes it somewhat less efficient. ISL adds several more bits to ends of the frame, making it easier to view the trunking info bits, but the higher number of bits makes the MTU that much higher as well. Dot1Q doesn't have such a pronounced effect on MTU as does ISL. I typically use Dot1Q these days. Knowing that Cisco is moving away from ISL and the fact that other vendor's equipment supports Dot1Q makes it a more sensible choice for future compatibility. Rik ""Lopez, Robert"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... What are the differences between isl and 802.1q trunking. If I'm in a total cisco switched environment, should I always use isl? What would be a good reason to use 802.1q? Which one is more favored over the other? Robert Robert M. Lopez Network Planning Ann Arbor Data Center Pfizer Global Research Development _ 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] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] = _ Moe Tavakoli __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking
Hi All - My question relates to the trunking topic so I hope you would help. If I have a Cisco 3620 with 1 fast ethernet port, can I implement "routing on a stick" method with my 3Com CoreBuilder 5000 Switch? I assume I have to use "do1q" enscapsulation. If possible, how should I do it? Thanks in advance! Thomas ""Lopez, Robert"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... What are the differences between isl and 802.1q trunking. If I'm in a total cisco switched environment, should I always use isl? What would be a good reason to use 802.1q? Which one is more favored over the other? Robert Robert M. Lopez Network Planning Ann Arbor Data Center Pfizer Global Research Development _ 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]
RE: Trunking
Do you have an uplink module on your Sup blade? Do a "show port capabilities" to see what it can do. Else you are in the market for a 5225R blade that does dot1Q, ISL, and EtherChannel. -Original Message- From: Marakalas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, March 05, 2001 9:02 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Trunking I have a Catalyst 5505 switch with a WS-X5201 module and also have a WS-C2948G switch that I want to connect to the Catalyst 5505. I want to create multiple VLANs on the WS-C2948G switch and I see that it only supports 802.1q. The Catalyst 5505 module does not allow me to configure the Trunk. __ Do You Yahoo!? Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ _ 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]
Re: Trunking Modes in production environment...
The differences between auto and desirable is that desireable trys to become a trunk, auto only is poked at with DTP frames requesting it act as a trunk. With auto being the default for Fast/Gig Ethernet, you won't have trunks coming up in places that you don't expect. The other end will have to be set in on or desirable to actively convert the link to a trunk. ""Pierre-Alex GUANEL"" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Hi All, I have been struggling all morning trying to understand the difference between the "auto" mode and "desirable" mode. The only difference I have found is that : Auto+Auto = no trunking, where as Desirable + Desirable = trunking Apart from that the Auto and Desirable behave the same way. So when would you use "auto" and when would you use "desirable"? I am sure that if those modes exist, it is because there is some practical use for them in a production environment . Pierre-Alex _ 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]
Re: Trunking
On a 2912XL switch, I believe the command is "switchport mode trunk". At least that is the command on a 2924XL. John Hi Group, Could someone tell me what IOS do I need in order to turn on trunking on a cisco 2912XL switch. I'm currently running 12.0(5.1)XP but it doesn't understand the "trunk on" command under the fe interfaces. Thanks. _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Send a cool gift with your E-Card http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: trunking problem
Your post isn't very clear as to exactly where you are seeing CRC errors - is it just on the switch ports? Or is it on the router as well? I've been having a similar problem with a Catalyst 1900. Its got a port that reported a LOT of CRC and aligmnent errors. Absolutely abysmal file transfer rates (if the files were able to be transferred at all). I swapped cables between the PC and the switch port - no change in the error rates. The NIC was definitely set to 10 Mbps half-duplex operation (as was the switch port) so it wasn't a case of duplex or speed mismatch. I unplugged the PC from the switch port, bypassed the switch plugging the PC directly to a 3COM hub--the file transfer performance of the PC increased dramatically. That was with a bare-bones switch configuration - no trunking, no configuration of VLANs. The switch doesn't show any problems during the POST with any of its hardware... Other ports seem to be fine (but I haven't had time to test every port on the switch). In your case, two options come to mind: 1. See if you've got bad ports that are not being reported by the switch diagnostics. Select ports on your switch that you are not receiving CRC errors on - reconfigure the switch to use those ports as trunk ports (and move your server to a port other than port 23). See if your problem disappears... 2. If you've got a service contract, ask Cisco to send replacement hardware and let them figure out the problem. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rick Thompson Sent: December 18, 2000 10:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking problem Let's see if anyone can figure this one out: Running into an interesting problem with trunking. We have multiple setups running this configuration and running into CRC's on the trunk ports, and slow transfer and corrupted files sent inbetween the vlans. Currently we have had 2 ccie from cisco look at it with no help, and TAC has been working it for 5 days with no luck so far. We have 50 locations with this setup and 6 of them are reporting corrupted files. There is a 3640 router with 2FE and the switch is either a 3524xl or 3548XL, all code, cards, memory and flash are identical. The 3640 is setup as follows: interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address no cdp enable speed 100 duplex full no ip directed-broadcast interface FastEthernet0/1.1 description Trusted Network encapsulation isl 1 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.1 255.255.255.128 interface FastEthernet0/1.2 description Display Network encapsulation isl 2 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.129 255.255.255.192 interface FastEthernet0/1.3 description untrusted Network encapsulation isl 3 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.193 255.255.255.192 The 3524XL or 3548XL is configured as follows: interface fast ethernet 0/24 description router speed 100 duplex full switchport mode trunk The CRC increment atleast 1 every 7 secs. The more data that gets transfere, the worse it gets. We also see CRC's on port 23 which is the server. I tried switching from isl trunking to dotq and that appeared to slow down the CRC, but that is it. Anybody have any ideas? Rick Thompson CCNA, MCSE __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _ 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]
RE: trunking problem
I am currently having the same problem right now with a 3640 trunking to a FE card in a 2912MF. If you change to dotq do you see runt packets? The router interface does not collect errors of any kind. TAC just sent me a new 2912. I will let you know if I find anything. Chuck Collins CCNP Your post isn't very clear as to exactly where you are seeing CRC errors - is it just on the switch ports? Or is it on the router as well? I've been having a similar problem with a Catalyst 1900. Its got a port that reported a LOT of CRC and aligmnent errors. Absolutely abysmal file transfer rates (if the files were able to be transferred at all). I swapped cables between the PC and the switch port - no change in the error rates. The NIC was definitely set to 10 Mbps half-duplex operation (as was the switch port) so it wasn't a case of duplex or speed mismatch. I unplugged the PC from the switch port, bypassed the switch plugging the PC directly to a 3COM hub--the file transfer performance of the PC increased dramatically. That was with a bare-bones switch configuration - no trunking, no configuration of VLANs. The switch doesn't show any problems during the POST with any of its hardware... Other ports seem to be fine (but I haven't had time to test every port on the switch). In your case, two options come to mind: 1. See if you've got bad ports that are not being reported by the switch diagnostics. Select ports on your switch that you are not receiving CRC errors on - reconfigure the switch to use those ports as trunk ports (and move your server to a port other than port 23). See if your problem disappears... 2. If you've got a service contract, ask Cisco to send replacement hardware and let them figure out the problem. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rick Thompson Sent: December 18, 2000 10:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking problem Let's see if anyone can figure this one out: Running into an interesting problem with trunking. We have multiple setups running this configuration and running into CRC's on the trunk ports, and slow transfer and corrupted files sent inbetween the vlans. Currently we have had 2 ccie from cisco look at it with no help, and TAC has been working it for 5 days with no luck so far. We have 50 locations with this setup and 6 of them are reporting corrupted files. There is a 3640 router with 2FE and the switch is either a 3524xl or 3548XL, all code, cards, memory and flash are identical. The 3640 is setup as follows: interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address no cdp enable speed 100 duplex full no ip directed-broadcast interface FastEthernet0/1.1 description Trusted Network encapsulation isl 1 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.1 255.255.255.128 interface FastEthernet0/1.2 description Display Network encapsulation isl 2 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.129 255.255.255.192 interface FastEthernet0/1.3 description untrusted Network encapsulation isl 3 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.193 255.255.255.192 The 3524XL or 3548XL is configured as follows: interface fast ethernet 0/24 description router speed 100 duplex full switchport mode trunk The CRC increment atleast 1 every 7 secs. The more data that gets transfere, the worse it gets. We also see CRC's on port 23 which is the server. I tried switching from isl trunking to dotq and that appeared to slow down the CRC, but that is it. Anybody have any ideas? Rick Thompson CCNA, MCSE __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _ 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] _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking problem-Answer
Turn the "keepalives" off on the router interface. Look at Bug ID: CSCdm31600 Have a great Christmas! God Bless! Chuck Collins CCNP I am currently having the same problem right now with a 3640 trunking to a FE card in a 2912MF. If you change to dotq do you see runt packets? The router interface does not collect errors of any kind. TAC just sent me a new 2912. I will let you know if I find anything. Chuck Collins CCNP Your post isn't very clear as to exactly where you are seeing CRC errors - is it just on the switch ports? Or is it on the router as well? I've been having a similar problem with a Catalyst 1900. Its got a port that reported a LOT of CRC and aligmnent errors. Absolutely abysmal file transfer rates (if the files were able to be transferred at all). I swapped cables between the PC and the switch port - no change in the error rates. The NIC was definitely set to 10 Mbps half-duplex operation (as was the switch port) so it wasn't a case of duplex or speed mismatch. I unplugged the PC from the switch port, bypassed the switch plugging the PC directly to a 3COM hub--the file transfer performance of the PC increased dramatically. That was with a bare-bones switch configuration - no trunking, no configuration of VLANs. The switch doesn't show any problems during the POST with any of its hardware... Other ports seem to be fine (but I haven't had time to test every port on the switch). In your case, two options come to mind: 1. See if you've got bad ports that are not being reported by the switch diagnostics. Select ports on your switch that you are not receiving CRC errors on - reconfigure the switch to use those ports as trunk ports (and move your server to a port other than port 23). See if your problem disappears... 2. If you've got a service contract, ask Cisco to send replacement hardware and let them figure out the problem. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rick Thompson Sent: December 18, 2000 10:49 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking problem Let's see if anyone can figure this one out: Running into an interesting problem with trunking. We have multiple setups running this configuration and running into CRC's on the trunk ports, and slow transfer and corrupted files sent inbetween the vlans. Currently we have had 2 ccie from cisco look at it with no help, and TAC has been working it for 5 days with no luck so far. We have 50 locations with this setup and 6 of them are reporting corrupted files. There is a 3640 router with 2FE and the switch is either a 3524xl or 3548XL, all code, cards, memory and flash are identical. The 3640 is setup as follows: interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address no cdp enable speed 100 duplex full no ip directed-broadcast interface FastEthernet0/1.1 description Trusted Network encapsulation isl 1 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.1 255.255.255.128 interface FastEthernet0/1.2 description Display Network encapsulation isl 2 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.129 255.255.255.192 interface FastEthernet0/1.3 description untrusted Network encapsulation isl 3 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.193 255.255.255.192 The 3524XL or 3548XL is configured as follows: interface fast ethernet 0/24 description router speed 100 duplex full switchport mode trunk The CRC increment atleast 1 every 7 secs. The more data that gets transfere, the worse it gets. We also see CRC's on port 23 which is the server. I tried switching from isl trunking to dotq and that appeared to slow down the CRC, but that is it. Anybody have any ideas? Rick Thompson CCNA, MCSE __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _ 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] _ 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]
Re: trunking problem
Hi, I'm not sure if this helps but running ISL on the trunk ports increases the the packet size beyond 1500 bytes. This can produce a CRC error. Whilst the error exists however the data still goes through ok. You can check this by doing an extended ping and lifting the packet size to beyond 1486 bytes. Teunis, Hobart, Tasmania Australia On Monday, December 18, 2000 at 09:49:28 PM, Rick Thompson wrote: Let's see if anyone can figure this one out: Running into an interesting problem with trunking. We have multiple setups running this configuration and running into CRC's on the trunk ports, and slow transfer and corrupted files sent inbetween the vlans. Currently we have had 2 ccie from cisco look at it with no help, and TAC has been working it for 5 days with no luck so far. We have 50 locations with this setup and 6 of them are reporting corrupted files. There is a 3640 router with 2FE and the switch is either a 3524xl or 3548XL, all code, cards, memory and flash are identical. The 3640 is setup as follows: interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address no cdp enable speed 100 duplex full no ip directed-broadcast interface FastEthernet0/1.1 description Trusted Network encapsulation isl 1 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.1 255.255.255.128 interface FastEthernet0/1.2 description Display Network encapsulation isl 2 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.129 255.255.255.192 interface FastEthernet0/1.3 description untrusted Network encapsulation isl 3 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.193 255.255.255.192 The 3524XL or 3548XL is configured as follows: interface fast ethernet 0/24 description router speed 100 duplex full switchport mode trunk The CRC increment atleast 1 every 7 secs. The more data that gets transfere, the worse it gets. We also see CRC's on port 23 which is the server. I tried switching from isl trunking to dotq and that appeared to slow down the CRC, but that is it. Anybody have any ideas? Rick Thompson CCNA, MCSE __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- www.tasmail.com _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: trunking problem
To my knowledge, if both devices are ISL capable, it will NOT produce a CRC error- even though the packet size is above 1500 bytes. It's smart enough to know why :) -Original Message- From: Tony van Ree [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 3:19 PM To: Rick Thompson; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: trunking problem Hi, I'm not sure if this helps but running ISL on the trunk ports increases the the packet size beyond 1500 bytes. This can produce a CRC error. Whilst the error exists however the data still goes through ok. You can check this by doing an extended ping and lifting the packet size to beyond 1486 bytes. Teunis, Hobart, Tasmania Australia On Monday, December 18, 2000 at 09:49:28 PM, Rick Thompson wrote: Let's see if anyone can figure this one out: Running into an interesting problem with trunking. We have multiple setups running this configuration and running into CRC's on the trunk ports, and slow transfer and corrupted files sent inbetween the vlans. Currently we have had 2 ccie from cisco look at it with no help, and TAC has been working it for 5 days with no luck so far. We have 50 locations with this setup and 6 of them are reporting corrupted files. There is a 3640 router with 2FE and the switch is either a 3524xl or 3548XL, all code, cards, memory and flash are identical. The 3640 is setup as follows: interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address no cdp enable speed 100 duplex full no ip directed-broadcast interface FastEthernet0/1.1 description Trusted Network encapsulation isl 1 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.1 255.255.255.128 interface FastEthernet0/1.2 description Display Network encapsulation isl 2 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.129 255.255.255.192 interface FastEthernet0/1.3 description untrusted Network encapsulation isl 3 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.193 255.255.255.192 The 3524XL or 3548XL is configured as follows: interface fast ethernet 0/24 description router speed 100 duplex full switchport mode trunk The CRC increment atleast 1 every 7 secs. The more data that gets transfere, the worse it gets. We also see CRC's on port 23 which is the server. I tried switching from isl trunking to dotq and that appeared to slow down the CRC, but that is it. Anybody have any ideas? Rick Thompson CCNA, MCSE __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- www.tasmail.com _ 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]
RE: trunking problem
a packet over the size of 1500 would produce a giant ... not necessarily a CRC. Regards, Jason Baker Network Engineer MCSE, CCNA -Original Message- From: Tony van Ree [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, December 20, 2000 8:19 AM To: Rick Thompson; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: trunking problem Hi, I'm not sure if this helps but running ISL on the trunk ports increases the the packet size beyond 1500 bytes. This can produce a CRC error. Whilst the error exists however the data still goes through ok. You can check this by doing an extended ping and lifting the packet size to beyond 1486 bytes. Teunis, Hobart, Tasmania Australia On Monday, December 18, 2000 at 09:49:28 PM, Rick Thompson wrote: Let's see if anyone can figure this one out: Running into an interesting problem with trunking. We have multiple setups running this configuration and running into CRC's on the trunk ports, and slow transfer and corrupted files sent inbetween the vlans. Currently we have had 2 ccie from cisco look at it with no help, and TAC has been working it for 5 days with no luck so far. We have 50 locations with this setup and 6 of them are reporting corrupted files. There is a 3640 router with 2FE and the switch is either a 3524xl or 3548XL, all code, cards, memory and flash are identical. The 3640 is setup as follows: interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address no cdp enable speed 100 duplex full no ip directed-broadcast interface FastEthernet0/1.1 description Trusted Network encapsulation isl 1 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.1 255.255.255.128 interface FastEthernet0/1.2 description Display Network encapsulation isl 2 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.129 255.255.255.192 interface FastEthernet0/1.3 description untrusted Network encapsulation isl 3 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.193 255.255.255.192 The 3524XL or 3548XL is configured as follows: interface fast ethernet 0/24 description router speed 100 duplex full switchport mode trunk The CRC increment atleast 1 every 7 secs. The more data that gets transfere, the worse it gets. We also see CRC's on port 23 which is the server. I tried switching from isl trunking to dotq and that appeared to slow down the CRC, but that is it. Anybody have any ideas? Rick Thompson CCNA, MCSE __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- www.tasmail.com _ 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]
RE: trunking problem
I dont see you specify ISL encapsulation on the 35XX -Original Message- From: Rick Thompson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 7:49 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: trunking problem Let's see if anyone can figure this one out: Running into an interesting problem with trunking. We have multiple setups running this configuration and running into CRC's on the trunk ports, and slow transfer and corrupted files sent inbetween the vlans. Currently we have had 2 ccie from cisco look at it with no help, and TAC has been working it for 5 days with no luck so far. We have 50 locations with this setup and 6 of them are reporting corrupted files. There is a 3640 router with 2FE and the switch is either a 3524xl or 3548XL, all code, cards, memory and flash are identical. The 3640 is setup as follows: interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address no cdp enable speed 100 duplex full no ip directed-broadcast interface FastEthernet0/1.1 description Trusted Network encapsulation isl 1 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.1 255.255.255.128 interface FastEthernet0/1.2 description Display Network encapsulation isl 2 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.129 255.255.255.192 interface FastEthernet0/1.3 description untrusted Network encapsulation isl 3 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.193 255.255.255.192 The 3524XL or 3548XL is configured as follows: interface fast ethernet 0/24 description router speed 100 duplex full switchport mode trunk The CRC increment atleast 1 every 7 secs. The more data that gets transfere, the worse it gets. We also see CRC's on port 23 which is the server. I tried switching from isl trunking to dotq and that appeared to slow down the CRC, but that is it. Anybody have any ideas? Rick Thompson CCNA, MCSE __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _ 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]
RE: trunking problem
That was the first thing i checked into, it does ISL by default. I tried putting it in there and got the same result. --- Olden Pieterse [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I dont see you specify ISL encapsulation on the 35XX -Original Message- From: Rick Thompson [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2000 7:49 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:trunking problem Let's see if anyone can figure this one out: Running into an interesting problem with trunking. We have multiple setups running this configuration and running into CRC's on the trunk ports, and slow transfer and corrupted files sent inbetween the vlans. Currently we have had 2 ccie from cisco look at it with no help, and TAC has been working it for 5 days with no luck so far. We have 50 locations with this setup and 6 of them are reporting corrupted files. There is a 3640 router with 2FE and the switch is either a 3524xl or 3548XL, all code, cards, memory and flash are identical. The 3640 is setup as follows: interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address no cdp enable speed 100 duplex full no ip directed-broadcast interface FastEthernet0/1.1 description Trusted Network encapsulation isl 1 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.1 255.255.255.128 interface FastEthernet0/1.2 description Display Network encapsulation isl 2 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.129 255.255.255.192 interface FastEthernet0/1.3 description untrusted Network encapsulation isl 3 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.193 255.255.255.192 The 3524XL or 3548XL is configured as follows: interface fast ethernet 0/24 description router speed 100 duplex full switchport mode trunk The CRC increment atleast 1 every 7 secs. The more data that gets transfere, the worse it gets. We also see CRC's on port 23 which is the server. I tried switching from isl trunking to dotq and that appeared to slow down the CRC, but that is it. Anybody have any ideas? Rick Thompson CCNA, MCSE __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: trunking problem
Interesting. Have you tried to make the connects regular ports (not trunks) and disable all autoneg (trunk, port channel, duplex, speed, etc). I realize that you may not be able to do a non-trunk test easily but if you can that would narrow the problem down further to a trunking issue or not. I ran into a problem with trunking AND port-channel on a 35xx in the past which was hardware. On the switch console are you getting errors, warnings, etc? As a further test, you could connect a switch port to another switch and see if CRC errors occur between 2 switches. Same test for router. If only certain 3640's and 35xx XLs are reporting the CRC errors have you tried swapping modules, the entire switch, etc to see if CRC errors follow the switch/router or stay at that site? Just some ideas to narrow it down... --- Rick Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's see if anyone can figure this one out: Running into an interesting problem with trunking. We have multiple setups running this configuration and running into CRC's on the trunk ports, and slow transfer and corrupted files sent inbetween the vlans. Currently we have had 2 ccie from cisco look at it with no help, and TAC has been working it for 5 days with no luck so far. We have 50 locations with this setup and 6 of them are reporting corrupted files. There is a 3640 router with 2FE and the switch is either a 3524xl or 3548XL, all code, cards, memory and flash are identical. The 3640 is setup as follows: interface FastEthernet0/1 no ip address no cdp enable speed 100 duplex full no ip directed-broadcast interface FastEthernet0/1.1 description Trusted Network encapsulation isl 1 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.1 255.255.255.128 interface FastEthernet0/1.2 description Display Network encapsulation isl 2 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.129 255.255.255.192 interface FastEthernet0/1.3 description untrusted Network encapsulation isl 3 no ip directed-broadcast no ip redirects ip address x.x.x.193 255.255.255.192 The 3524XL or 3548XL is configured as follows: interface fast ethernet 0/24 description router speed 100 duplex full switchport mode trunk The CRC increment atleast 1 every 7 secs. The more data that gets transfere, the worse it gets. We also see CRC's on port 23 which is the server. I tried switching from isl trunking to dotq and that appeared to slow down the CRC, but that is it. Anybody have any ideas? Rick Thompson CCNA, MCSE __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products. http://shopping.yahoo.com/ _ FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Trunking--
Stuart, There is a possibility that all links to a router can be a trunk but why do you want to do that?. You would only need a trunk link to a switch if you have multiple vlans and are using the router to route traffic between them. A link would not be a trunk if is an access port in which the port belongs to only one vlan. The port can't receive information form other vlan's unless the information has been routed. Secondly an Hybrid link is where the link is both a Trunk and Access link. These carry both frames, with Tagged frames for Vlan information and untagged frames without vlan information. Therefore it will receive both Tagged and untagged frames. To answer the third question. There is nothing much to consider except the fact that to configure HSRP over an ISL link between vlans do the following 1. Define the encapsulation format which in your case will be ISL 2.Define the IP address and enable HSRP. However remember that you are configuring this on the sub interfaces not the primary interface i.e. Interface fast Ethernet 1/1 .20 encapsulation isl 20. The 20 in the first command is for the sub interface 20. I hope this helps and is not misleading. Tai -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Stuart Laubstein Sent: 22 November 2000 10:15 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Trunking-- I have to write my BCMSN tommorow and have managed to confuse myself about trunking. Are the following points correct please. 1. Am i correct in that all links between switches and or routers can be trunks if the hardware supports it? When would a link not be a trunk 2. Why would a trunk be an hybrid trunk-if it is directly connected wouldnt it only receive tagged OR untagged frames and not both? 3. Is ther aynthing special to remember about configuring a trunk from HSRP routers usning ISL? thanks stuart p.s. any last minute suggestions for the BCMSN also gladly accepted _ Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com _ 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]
