ess! ;-)
A fix would be pretty easy. The vulnerability required a host on an access
port to send a frame with a VLAN tag already in it. That could easily be
disallowed. (The switch itself should add any tags when sending across a
trunk link. Or, a server on a trunk link could include a tag, b
Oppenheimer"
> Date: 2002/08/01 Thu PM 03:40:39 EDT
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Cat2950 VLAN 1 ip address...can't connect [7:50331]
>
> Turpin, Mark wrote:
> >
> > I'm referring to trunks, sorry.
>
> There were some vulnerabilities related
Turpin, Mark wrote:
>
> I'm referring to trunks, sorry.
There were some vulnerabilities related to this, but actually the fix was to
make sure the native VLAN wasn't trunked, if I understand it correctly
Although the vulnerabilities caused a big stir, they were hard
I'm referring to trunks, sorry.
-Original Message-
From: MADMAN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 12:14 PM
To: Turpin, Mark
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Cat2950 VLAN 1 ip address...can't connect [7:50331]
Not sure what you mean. Your not ch
Not sure what you mean. Your not changing the default VLAN, VLAN 1
will remain, can't delete it, (not talking about trunks). I know of no
problems arising when using a VLAN other than 1 for inband connectivity.
Dave
"Turpin, Mark" wrote:
>
> Lore has it that changing
That would explain why I see traffic on my VLAN that should be on a
different VLAN.
>>> "Turpin, Mark" 08/01/02 08:55AM >>>
Lore has it that changing the default vlan can result in leaking.
Real life experiences?
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: MADMAN [mai
Lore has it that changing the default vlan can result in leaking.
Real life experiences?
-Mark
-Original Message-
From: MADMAN [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 10:30 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Cat2950 VLAN 1 ip address...can't connect [7:
I will just put the management vlan to 100. Thank you everyone for your
help! Dain.
""Dain Deutschman"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Any ideas why I cannot ping or otherwise connect to 192.168.0.8/24..the IP
> address of this C
What do they mean by management? for inband managment you could use
any VLAN, large switched networks will often choose a VLAN that is used
for inband management only. VLAN 1 also is used by the switches for
management via VTP, spanning, DISL, PAGP etc.
Dave
Dain Deutschman wrote
There was a time that it did just work. I remember when the 2900/3500
switches first came out, you could not configure any other VLAN except
VLAN 1 for management. I connected the switch to our labnet, VLAN64 and
it worked. I just tried it again on a 2950, no cigar.
Put you mangamnet VLAN
Nor can you configure an ip address on a vty...
Dave
Larry Letterman wrote:
>
> I dont see what assigning an IP to the vty lines has to do with
> ability to ping the switches management interface on vlan 1. The vty
> lines should respond to the telnet request on the SC0 i
Thanks for everyones input. I guess where I was confused is that they
recommend I think in the BCMSN book that VLAN 1 is used for management
purposes only. But I guess that would be in a routed multiple vlan
environment. I guess in a small network with one switch it really does not
matter and
and that wont stop a ping request either...the interface sc0 will
respond to the ping when the network and switch is set up correctly.
This issue is a problem with vlan 1 and vlan 100 not talking to each other
and either needs a router to connect to the switch or needs the mgmt vlan
changed to
because the management vlan and the pinging host vlan need to be the same.
I have plenty of 'set' based switches, and the ip for the sc0 interface has
to be in the same vlan that your pc is in on the switch, or else you need to
configure
the switch with an ip default route if its o
Chuck is correct...My bad..
the ios based switches use the vlan 1 by default and can use other
vlans if the vlan 1 interface is put in the shutdown mode.
SC0 interface is on the set based switches...
Larry Letterman
Cisco Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL
See my comments,,,
From: Dain Deutschman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 3:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Cat2950 VLAN 1 ip address...can't connect [7:50331]
The PC I am pinging from is in VLAN 100. I realize that vlan to vlan
communication requires a r
just to be a know-it-all, there is no Sc0 interface on the 2950 or 3550
series that I can determine. near as I can tell, you put the ip either on a
loopback interface or on the management vlan, whatever that may be.
which is all fine with me. I never did get that Sc0 idea anyway :->
&quo
Dain Deutschman wrote:
>
> The PC I am pinging from is in VLAN 100. I realize that vlan to
> vlan
> communication requires a router...however, I was under the
> impression that
> the management vlan just "worked" when you gave it an IP.
Nothing "just works&qu
I am sorry not ip address I meant no password has been assigned to vty
lines..
Original Message-
From: Larry Letterman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 3:57 PM
To: Tribavan Raina; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Cat2950 VLAN 1 ip address...can't connect [7:
I dont see what assigning an IP to the vty lines has to do with
ability to ping the switches management interface on vlan 1. The vty
lines should respond to the telnet request on the SC0 interfaces ip
address...
Larry Letterman
Cisco Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message
The PC I am pinging from is in VLAN 100. I realize that vlan to vlan
communication requires a router...however, I was under the impression that
the management vlan just "worked" when you gave it an IP. Much like entering
"set interface sc0 192.168.0.8 255.255.255.0" on a set b
2628
Fax: +64 4 385 2400
www.techtonics.co.nz
-Original Message-
From: Daniel Cotts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2002 12:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Cat2950 VLAN 1 ip address...can't connect [7:50331]
The switch is in VLAN 1 while all the ports a
The switch is in VLAN 1 while all the ports are in VLAN 100. You did not
specify from where you were attempting to ping. I see no trunking ports that
would connect both VLANs to a box with a routing function. Adding that is
one solution.
Or consider changing the management VLAN to 100. (Arguments
all your access ports are in vlan 100 and the management interface
is on vlan 1...try putting the access ports in vlan 1 or shutdown the
vlan 1 interface and create the management interface on vlan 100..
Larry Letterman
Cisco Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original Message-
From
ro
> no ip finger
> no ip domain-lookup
> !
> !
> !
> interface FastEthernet0/1
> switchport access vlan 100
>
> interface FastEthernet0/2
> switchport access vlan 100
> !
> interface FastEthernet0/3
> switchport access vlan 100
> !
> interface FastEthernet0/4
-encryption
!
hostname UPIJAK
!
no logging console
!
ip subnet-zero
no ip finger
no ip domain-lookup
!
!
!
interface FastEthernet0/1
switchport access vlan 100
interface FastEthernet0/2
switchport access vlan 100
!
interface FastEthernet0/3
switchport access vlan 100
!
interface FastEthernet0/4
it or overload the capacity, they may not bother you for years, can a
rotuer in an IP network do that?
Kent
- Original Message -
From: "bbfaye"
To:
Sent: Friday, July 26, 2002 1:21 AM
Subject: Re: mpls-l2 vpn vs. vlan [7:49346]
> Kent,
> I heard equant guys managing a
Well there's some information missing. I see you only have 8 gig
ports, but where do VLANs come into play there? We need more
information.
Mike W.
"John Brandis" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> G'day all.
>
> G
G'day all.
Got a question regarding VLAN trunking in a switched environment. Say for
example, I have a Catalyst 5509 in my network at the core, and then I have
lower end catalyst switch's with a gigabit port on each. In this example,
lets say I have 14 VLANS to connect, however I o
nd provisioning standpoint. You might want to find
someone
> who worked at Yipes to give you some ideas.
I agree that STP should not be beyond the campus, anything up from better be
ip based.
I think the original question was about how to separate vpns on lower end
devices,
either label or vlan t
VTP - is only used to disseminate information among switches in the
same VTP domain - or manage VLAN configurations. Setting a switch as a
server allows you to add/delete/modify VLAN's from that switch for the
entire VTP domain. If the VTP domain server dies :( no problem, your domain
wi
Hi,
When I have VLAN configured in my network and I have only one switch in VTP
mode Server. What happens when it goes down? Does another switch take over
or dows my network crumble?
If I have to have more than one switch configured as VTP Server switch, how
does the switch elect themselves to be
router is a Cisco device and it turns out it will support trunking,
then once you setup the trunking parameters, you would then create
sub-interfaces for each VLAN.
Rik
-Original Message-
From: Priscilla Oppenheimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 6:33 PM
To: [EMAIL
=?iso-8859-1?q?maine=20dude?= wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> If I have two Vlans and want to route between them using an
> external router,
> but the router has only 10mb ports, how can it be done? I can't
> use ISL or 802.1q because it isn't supported on 10mb/s ports,
&g
Well, here's the deal. What's the reason for the VLANs? Since each of
the PCs in each VLAN are on a different IP subnet, it's possible to just
combine all of the PCs into a single VLAN, then setup the router interface
with two IP addresses (one for each IP subnet). If your
ISL is not supported on 10mbs interfaces. You need the ISL header so that
you retain the VLAN information. If you had a 100mbs interface is would look
something like this. This would set up int fa0/0 as a trunk and it would be
trunking VLAN 1,2,3.
int fa0/0.1
encapsulation isl 1
Ip address
Hi,
If I have two Vlans and want to route between them using an external router,
but the router has only 10mb ports, how can it be done? I can't use ISL or
802.1q because it isn't supported on 10mb/s ports, correct? Does every Vlan
need a separate physical connection? or do i use sub
/cc/so/cuso/epso/sqfr/safe_wp.htm
-Original Message-
From: Don Claybrook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 6:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: How to keep multiple switch ports on the same VLAN from [7:49410]
I have a customer who needs to have several ports on
In my impression,most switches can not afford to large number of 802.1q vlan
trunk. hundreds of tunk vlan will cause the machine poor performance or
crash.
I suffer it with some intel's switches before.
I heard cisco and other vendor suggest not to use too many vlan trunk in
their
machine.
I like the idea put down earlier. Why have them on the same VLAN. From what
I know (an issue you can all debate) this would need to be assessed when you
design you network. The idea I use when building my switched network, is
grouping together users who have the same network needs, and allocating
Wha?!? What would that accomplish?
Mike W.
"Thomas Larus" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Keep the two ports apart by keeping them in separate VLANs, and turn the
> port that they both need to be able to access into a trunk port.
Message Posted at:
http://ww
port threshold.
>
> Winston V. Shaw
> CCIE(#7991)
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Don Claybrook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 3:17 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: How to keep multiple switch ports on the same VLAN from
> [7:4
st access gear at this point supports some type of MPLS however. What
> >type of gear are you using currently that makes it prohibitively expensive
> >to upgrade at this point?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >At 08:12 PM 7/21/2002 +, bbfaye wrote:
>
I agree with the other post... if you don't want 1 and 5 to access each
other, then what's the point of having them in the same VLAN?
Mike W.
"Winston Shaw" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Not sure, because I do not have a 2924
unwanted MAC tries to cross the port threshold.
Winston V. Shaw
CCIE(#7991)
-Original Message-
From: Don Claybrook [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 3:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: How to keep multiple switch ports on the same VLAN from
[7:49410]
I have a customer
ness subscribers.That means
we
>>have to place some mpls-enabled machines on the access nodes(expensive...).
>>Another choice is using vlan.And the users' vlan are trunked to the
>>aggressive
>>nodes.I think it's not so good to do this,but not so sure
At 1:46 PM + 7/23/02, Kent Yu wrote:
>I cannot see any problem using vlan from your access layer up to the
>aggregation point, as long as the PE has enough capacity to hold the routes.
>If necessary, you can always use several PEs in one location to spread out
>your aggregation,
he business subscribers.That means we
>have to place some mpls-enabled machines on the access nodes(expensive...).
>Another choice is using vlan.And the users' vlan are trunked to the
>aggressive
>nodes.I think it's not so good to do this,but not so sure about the
>disadvant
I cannot see any problem using vlan from your access layer up to the
aggregation point, as long as the PE has enough capacity to hold the routes.
If necessary, you can always use several PEs in one location to spread out
your aggregation, you may want to use some lower end routers/switches, kind
The only problem I see with Access lists on the router is the ports
having to be in the same VLAN. This will allow them to see each other
without going through the router. If the ports do not need to see each
other why the need to be in the same VLAN, you could try put the ports
in separate VLANS
]]
Sent: Tuesday, 23 July 2002 8:17 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: How to keep multiple switch ports on the same VLAN from
[7:49410]
I have a customer who needs to have several ports on a 2924XL-EN in the same
VLAN. The customer does not want these ports to be able to communicate with
one another
I have a customer who needs to have several ports on a 2924XL-EN in the same
VLAN. The customer does not want these ports to be able to communicate with
one another, but would like all of them to be able to go to/through another
port. E.g., ports 1 to 5 would be on VLAN 50, they'd all be
we are handling a case of a MAN project now.
We plan to use mpls-l2 vpn to connect the business subscribers.That means we
have to place some mpls-enabled machines on the access nodes(expensive...).
Another choice is using vlan.And the users' vlan are trunked to the
aggressive
nodes.I think
If you configured the VLAN on a server and VTP was up and running
between the switches that should have worked.
All your switches can be servers if you like though I don't recommend
it..
Dave
GEORGE wrote:
>
> The switches were set to client and only one was set to server,howev
I am setting up different closets in the building to use different VLAN's
for the PC's. But, all printers will be on the their own VLAN. So what I
would like to do is enter the printer MAC addresses in a table for using
dynamic VLAN's and have a different fallback VLAN (if the M
transparent mode wont update the vtp domain info
to or from a server. If the info was inserted from
a switch in transparent mode it wont go anywhere.
If the new vlan data was inserted in a switch that is
running in server mode, it will propagate the info to
other servers and clients in the same
The switches were set to client and only one was set to server,however
when I added the vlan name to the server it did not propogate to the
other switches I wonder why? How many vtp severs can I have in one
domain
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On
You have to be either transparent or server mode to add a VLAN. Were
you in client mode originally?
Dave
GEORGE wrote:
>
> I got it to work!!!
> The only thing I had to change was on the transparent mode add the vlan
> and the name and it work, those this have to happen every ti
MADMAN wrote:
>
> You have to be either transparent or server mode to add a
> VLAN. Were
> you in client mode originally?
You statement is 100% correct. However, I think it is important to make it
clear that if a switch is in transparent mode, the VLAN you create (or
modify/delete
GEORGE wrote:
>
> I got it to work!!!
> The only thing I had to change was on the transparent mode add
> the vlan
> and the name and it work, those this have to happen every time
> you add a
> new vlan to the switch network?
Why are you using transparent mode? Why
I got it to work!!!
The only thing I had to change was on the transparent mode add the vlan
and the name and it work, those this have to happen every time you add a
new vlan to the switch network?
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of
:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, July 18, 2002 10:44 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Help with vlan!! [7:49127]
I currently have just 2 vlan's in my network. The native 1 and vlan 2. I
have a 7513 doing the routing with a fast Ethernet and 3500xl and 2900xl
in my network. I have one vtp s
I currently have just 2 vlan's in my network. The native 1 and vlan 2. I
have a 7513 doing the routing with a fast Ethernet and 3500xl and 2900xl
in my network. I have one vtp server and I added vlan 2 it works! .
then I created another vlan 3 on the router with ip 10.0.4.1 isl
encapsul
For each VLAN, you have to define it on the Switch Port, i.e., if you
have 10 vlans, and you have a 12, 24, or 48 port module for module 6,
than you need to decide your vlan assignment, and then make it so on a
per port basis.
You won't assign an IP Address to the Switch Port, but you
figure for example
module 6 port 1, as part as VLAN 10, using ip 192.168.10.1/24 using ISL ?
And so on for every VLAN that comes back to my CAT5k ?
Thanks all for your time, really appreciate it.
John
**
visit http://www.sol
On Thu, 11 Jul 2002, John Brandis wrote:
> >From here, can I use as the access point of my network, other lower end
> catalyst switchs, and just plug them into their distribution points for
each
> VLAN at my Distribution layer,,,or does each access layer switch need to be
> fully
John, where in Sydney are you?
If you plug a switch or hub directly of a Distribution switch, there needs
to be no configured VLAN information (such as VTP) configured on the end
switch, provided you plug your switch/hub into a VLAN defined port on the
distry switch, that will work fine, however
e 10 fibre connections to my
distribution layer, each consisting of a Catalyst 2948 (think its that
model) in their respective VLAN. My question is around here.
>From here, can I use as the access point of my network, other lower end
catalyst switchs, and just plug them into their distribution po
Thanks for the info. Is it possible that normal Vlan & dynamic Vlan can
co-exist ?
-Original Message-
From: Andy Hoang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 25, 2002 7:16 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Need suggestion on MAC based VLAN [7:47284]
Assuming you are u
]
Subject: Need suggestion on MAC based VLAN [7:47284]
Dear Group
I want to know about implementing Mac based Vlan in Cisco. Can anybody help
me.
Many thanks in advance.
Hitesh
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=47341&
Dear Group
I want to know about implementing Mac based Vlan in Cisco. Can anybody help
me.
Many thanks in advance.
Hitesh
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=47284&t=47284
--
FAQ, list archives, and subs
calls this novell-ether. It's the default. Novell calls
it Ethernet_802.3. (There are two others also, Ethernet II and SNAP but
they aren't relevant.)
On your VLAN 11 where the clients reside, you have clients that use both
Ethernet_802.3 and Ethernet_802.2. On that VLAN you will n
Dear Group
I am configuring the IPX/SAP traffic forwarding between Vlan's on a catalyst
6006 with MSFC. The scenario is like this :-
cat6506(CORE)-cat4003(DISTRIBUTION)-cat2924(Access)clients
1) Vlan no. 15 >> Server Vlan
All my servers are connected to this Vla
Thanks to those who answered me--I was just being stupid. They were correct
in that the command I had to use was
set vlan 100 2/48
thanks again
stuart
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45223&t=45210
--
Morning all, I have been trying to set a VLAN on a port on a 2948 but it
will not work for me. I have been using set port membership 2/48 100 (with
2/48 being the port and module and 100 being the vlan. It will not accept it
for some reason. It will not accept any VLAN actually. TheVLAN in
Packets sent on the native VLAN do not have the VLAN tag in them, so they
can be read by non-vlan aware devices.
Ron
""Chan Stephen"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> Hi all
>
> Can someone tell me what is the purpose of the n
The only thing I know from the switching exam, is that it is the vlan number
the trunk uses in case the trunk feature fails.
Regards.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=45156&t=45146
--
FAQ, list archi
Hi all
Can someone tell me what is the purpose of the native vlan in Csico Switch?
What is the feature & main usage on that?
I am wondering if it is a proprietary feature, it will only work through
Cisco Switches only?
Thanks.
Cheers
Stephen
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/
Yes you can do this but what you probably forgot to do was shutdown
interface vlan 1. Until you shutdown vlan 1 the other vlan you created
will not come up.
Dave
Jeff Harris wrote:
>
> Does anyone know if you can use a VLAN interface for management on an
> IOS-based switch if said
Does anyone know if you can use a VLAN interface for management on an
IOS-based switch if said VLAN was learned via VTP? I was unable to set it up
that way awhile back. I have ran into this awhile back and never did get to
troubleshoot it.
The switch in question was a 3524XL. The VTP server was
It's not clear what your asking but the switch inband management ip
address and the VTP domain have nothing to do with each other.
Dave
Edward Sohn wrote:
>
> hey all
>
> i've got a question, that seems logical enough, but I can't find any
> explanation/answer for it anywhere on CCO or Cis
SC0 can be placed in any VLAN you specify. All ports default to VLAN 1 so
putting it there may not be prudent depending on your specific security
needs. For example, I have used VLAN 999 in DMZs before as the "managment
rail" for the switches.
HTH
Darren
At 02:13 PM 5/14/2002 -0
hey all
i've got a question, that seems logical enough, but I can't find any
explanation/answer for it anywhere on CCO or Cisco Press...
Anyway, if I'm creating a VTP domain with multiple switches and VLANs
and stuff, what do I set the IP addresses to for the switches,
themselves? I mean, they
I second that.
Theo
"Sean Knox"
Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
05/04/2002 09:52 AM
Please respond to "Sean Knox"
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
cc:
Subject:RE: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]
Correct me if I'm wrong, but VLAN prior
o you can use the older way of setting STP priority on a per vlan basis
for each vlan with round-robin vlan staggering on msfc's like (vlan 1
bridge-priority can be 1, on msfc 1 and 65000 on
vlan 2, and VICE VERSA for msfc 2)
check this doc
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/
At 8:52 PM -0400 5/3/02, Sean Knox wrote:
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but VLAN priorization isn't really load balancing-
>you are just forcing VLANS over a preselected path. It does not take into
>consideration that one VLAN may utilize more bandwidth than another.
>
&g
of MLPPP is that it can perform fragmentation
and reassembly of packets over a given size, so if it can do that, I would
assume that it can do per-packet load balancing...
Anyway.. weren't looking for that long winded response, were ya? =)
Mike W.
"Sean Knox" wrote in me
ent: Friday, May 03, 2002 5:05 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]
>
>
> Yes. An example would be two core 6500 trunked together. You have
> switches in the closets, one uplink to 6500A the other to 6500B. Set
> priority on even VLAN/s t
Correct me if I'm wrong, but VLAN priorization isn't really load balancing-
you are just forcing VLANS over a preselected path. It does not take into
consideration that one VLAN may utilize more bandwidth than another.
Sean
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED
iginal Message -
> From: "Steven A. Ridder"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 2:04 PM
> Subject: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]
>
>
> > Does anyone do any VLAN load balancing via STP in the real world? I've
> > never seen it yet, and am just cur
--
RFC 1149 Compliant.
Get in my head:
http://sar.dynu.com
""Howard C. Berkowitz"" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> At 5:04 PM -0400 5/3/02, Steven A. Ridder wrote:
> >Does anyone do any VLAN load balancing via STP in the r
Yes. An example would be two core 6500 trunked together. You have
switches in the closets, one uplink to 6500A the other to 6500B. Set
priority on even VLAN/s to A odd to B.
Dave
"Steven A. Ridder" wrote:
>
> Does anyone do any VLAN load balancing via STP in the real worl
yes..we use load balancing, if you call it that, in data centers..
Larry Letterman
Cisco Systems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Original Message -
From: "Steven A. Ridder"
To:
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2002 2:04 PM
Subject: VLAN Load balancing [7:43265]
> Does anyone do any VLAN load
At 5:04 PM -0400 5/3/02, Steven A. Ridder wrote:
>Does anyone do any VLAN load balancing via STP in the real world? I've
>never seen it yet, and am just curious if it's ever done.
Could you clarify a bit more what you are trying to do? 802.1D
specifically picks a single pa
Does anyone do any VLAN load balancing via STP in the real world? I've
never seen it yet, and am just curious if it's ever done.
--
RFC 1149 Compliant.
Get in my head:
http://sar.dynu.com
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i
No, that's not the case. If you think of it visually,
INTERNET->ROUTER->INTERFACE->ACL->LAN
Then you will see that the internet can still access the interface, and
it's address. Because really, you are pinging the router, not the
interface or the LAN.
On Thu, 2002-05-02 at 14:22, Michael Will
Jay,
Thanks for your input. But shouldn't ACL keep anything from other VLANs
from even pinging the gateway IP of VLAN511?
Mike W.
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=43152&t=43128
--
FAQ, list archives, and subscript
If 10.51.1.1 is the only IP active on that subnet, then the traffic is
not being sourced from that network, thus rendering the ACL irrelevant.
If, however, your host was connected to one of the ports on vlan 511,
you would not be able to communicate with the RSM past the ACL.
So, in other words
Here's the deal... I have a 5500 with RSM with a few VLANs on it,
each VLAN with an IP and the RSM is handling the routing for all VLANs.
I've got one VLAN in particular (511) that I'm experimenting with I
made the following access list:
Router#(config)access-list
I think the only significance is that they must match. In 802.1q the
native VLAN has no tag so the VLANs must match on each end so the
endpoints can deduce which VLAN the tagless packets belong.
Dave
"Lopez, Robert" wrote:
>
> Group,
>
> What is the significance of
201 - 300 of 980 matches
Mail list logo
