From: John Koehl (jfkoehl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Oct 03 2000 - 15:33:01 GMT-3
I think the best way to describe it is to not think of the vlans as "vlans"
in the ethernet world. Think more of legacy source route bridging. In a
router you assaign the token interface to a bridge group and point it to a
"virtual" ring number. The trcrf's are like the interface ring numbers and
the trbrf is like a virtual ring. This is how I understand it anyway.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Jack Heney
Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 1:36 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Token Ring Vlans
I'm a little confused about the use of the term "vlan" in a token ring
environment....I understand the difference between trbrf and trcrf (at least
I think I do), but as I am reading about configuring the 3900, a couple
questions pop up....When assigning ports to a ring and rings to a bridge,
both the bridges and the rings are assigned to vlans (with the rings also
being assigned a parent vlan...the trbrf)...I have always understood a vlan
to be a broadcast domain, where a routing function is required to get from
one vlan to another...Since multiple trcrf's can be connected via the same
parent trbrf, is a group of rings that share a bridge (trbrf) a single
broadfcast domain? If so, what advantage is gained by creating these vlans?
Also, can rings that don't share the same parent trbrf communicate without
some sort of routing occurring (i.e. across the switch backplane?) These
questions may sound sort of rudimentary, but I can't find a clear
description in the archives or on CCO (and I don't have access to a 3900).
Thanks in advance for any help....Jack Heney
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 08:25:23 GMT-3