Correct, The 2 lans across the wan are nothing more than 2 networks
with layer 3
router connections connecting them together. The vlan's are only
significant at the
local lan level to the host in the switch.
Larry
Thomas N. wrote:
>Hi Larry,
>
>I am using trunking on the LAN side of the rout
Hi Larry,
I am using trunking on the LAN side of the routers to route between VLANs.
However, WAN interfaces of these routers are not configured as trunk. The
WAN link is just connected using a different subnet. And no, I don't use
bridging. So if VLAN is just local significant, should it not b
I would think that you can bridge them with IRB/CRB but the vlan id
would not be
an issue since the connections are not using isl/dot1q trunking. You
would basically
be making a flat network across the wan links. The vlan information
will only propagate
across trunk links that pass the vlan id
Larry Letterman wrote:
>
> Not unless the routers were using trunking and it does not
> sound like
> they are...
> The L3 links to each lan switch dont know anything about the
> vlan .
>
> Larry
>
Larry,
Just curious... Can VLANs be bridged over a bridge group that includes
serial WAN connect
Not unless the routers were using trunking and it does not sound like
they are...
The L3 links to each lan switch dont know anything about the vlan .
Larry
Thomas N. wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I am wondering if the VLAN number is valid locally on a LAN only or it goes
>across the WAN link? In my sce
Unless you're doing some kind of bridging or IRB, this won't be a problem.
Even then, I'm not sure it would necessarily be a problem. In a "normal"
topology, VLANs are locally significant.
Thomas N. wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> I am wondering if the VLAN number is valid locally on a LAN
> only or
6 matches
Mail list logo
