Cisco will recognize multiple macs on a single port but they must all be in
the same vlan. Vlan assignment is per port. Your other option would be to
replace the non cisco hub with a cisco switch which is trunked to the main
switch.
--
-=Repy to group only... no personal=-
""NetEng"" wrote i
; -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Dennis
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 3:48 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: MAC address and VLANs [7:23950]
>
>
> Cisco will recognize multiple macs on a single port b
> -- Leigh Anne
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> > Dennis
> > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 3:48 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: MAC address and VLANs [7:23950]
> &g
multi".
>
> As for answering NetEng's question--I can't quite determine where multiple
> MAC addresses share the same switch port. Could you identify which switch
> that is?
>
>
> -- Leigh Anne
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL
7;s Corporation
(502) 261-4035
"NetEng"
cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: MAC address
and VLANs [7:2395
7;s Corporation
(502) 261-4035
"NetEng"
cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: MAC address
and VLANs [7:2395
ort. Could you identify which
switch
> > that is?
> >
> >
> > -- Leigh Anne
> >
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> > > Dennis
> > > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001
en configured to trunk.
> > >
> > > For more information on this feature, search Cisco's website using the
> > > keyword phrase "switchport multi".
> > >
> > > As for answering NetEng's question--I can't quite determine where
> mul
lla Oppenheimer
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 11:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MAC address and VLANs [7:23950]
The multi-VLAN feature that Leigh Anne mentioned might solve your problem.
The Cisco switch port could be associated with two VLANs that way. You
didn't say which switch you h
s commendable.
>
>Chuck
>
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
>Priscilla Oppenheimer
>Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 11:51 AM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: MAC address and VLANs [7:23950]
>
>
>The mult
them as the size of our well designed IP networks
grow because of the reasons you already mentioned.
Rik
-Original Message-
From: Chuck Larrieu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 7:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MAC address and VLANs [7:23950]
hoora
ing
out
> >another packet or two on 56K links. Anyone here see the point of ISDN
backup
> >for DS3 links? ;->
> >
> >Your forward thinking is commendable.
> >
> >Chuck
> >
> >-Original Message-
> >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PRO
yone here see the point of ISDN backup
>for DS3 links? ;->
>
>Your forward thinking is commendable.
>
>Chuck
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
>Priscilla Oppenheimer
>Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 11:51
PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Carroll Kong
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 5:20 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MAC address and VLANs [7:23950]
I cut a large portion of this the previous message. My argument
in that is that, we DO have broadcasting monsters. It is known as Windows
based PCs. Net
At 08:32 PM 10/24/01 -0700, Chuck Larrieu wrote:
>interesting points, and well taken.
>
>if one takes VLANs to be synonymous with subnets then sure.
>
>your 10.0.0.0/16 thought reminds me of the good old days when the Xylan
>marketing team was out hawking their "flatten the network" religion. In t
I'm curious... how bad do the collisions look? With so many hubs, I would
think that would consume more bandwidth than the broadcasts.
Ken
>>> "Carroll Kong" 10/24/01 11:34PM >>>
[snip]
Well, I admit, my response was a bit clouded by the fact that one of our
clients recently requested a rede
nal Message-
> From: Carroll Kong [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 12:34 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: MAC address and VLANs [7:23950]
>
> At 08:32 PM 10/24/01 -0700, Chuck Larrieu wrote:
> >interesting points, and well ta
rd phrase "switchport multi".
> > >
> > > As for answering NetEng's question--I can't quite determine where
> multiple
> > > MAC addresses share the same switch port. Could you identify which
> switch
> > > that is?
> > >
> > >
>
(502) 261-4035
"jeffrey
wang"
cc:
Sent by: Subject: Re: MAC address and
VLANs [7:23950]
nobody@groupst
Well, now you're really talking about the dark ages. ;-)
You are back to the early 1990s discussion about upgrading hubs to
switches. That's a good idea so that each port has 100 Mbps (or 10 Mbps)
rather than all ports sharing bandwidth and being in the same collision
domain. I can't think of
Priscilla,
Never fear, I and many others I think, consider any discussion you're a part
of a MUST READ! So feel free to ..
Prof. Tom Lisa, CCAI
Community College of Southern Nevada
Cisco Regional Networking Academy
Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
> Well, now you're reall
lto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 1:52 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: MAC address and VLANs [7:23950]
I couldn't agree more on this issue, Jeff. Norton's Ghost is Notorius for
hogging much of the backplane bandwidth on CAT5500s during a unicast TCP
session.
J
x27;s ugly.
-Original Message-
From: Baety Wayne A1C 18 CS/SCBX
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 11:14 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: RE: MAC address and VLANs [7:23950]
As well as it should when you're transferring 100's of
10/2001 10:40 am -
"Chuck
Larrieu" To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MAC addres
SO/CSDA on 25/10/2001 10:40 am -
"Chuck
Larrieu" To:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: MAC address and VLANs
[7:23950]
Sent
by:
nobody@groups
tudy.com
25/10/2001
te.
Chuck
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 11:26 PM
To: Chuck Larrieu
Subject: RE: Bandwidth was: RE: MAC address and VLANs [7:23950]
I haven't been to any of those particular spots myself, but I don't thin
26 matches
Mail list logo
