From: Rodgers Moore (rodgers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Fri Mar 02 2001 - 14:33:06 GMT-3
Like I qualified my statement, I tried to configure IRB bridging on a dot1q
trunk two weeks ago on a 7206vxr running 12.1.6 Enterprise. IOS kicked back an
error to the effect of "bridging on dot1q sub-interfaces is not supported at th
e
time."
Rodgers Moore
Sara Li wrote:
> dot1q does support bridging!
> difference between isl and dot1q is isl support one spaning tree per vlan,
> while dot1q is one spaning tree for all vlans. correct me if I am wrong.
>
> isl is for cisco device only, so if you have equipment other than cisco, you
> got to use dot1q.
>
> Sara
>
> >From: Rodgers Moore <rodgers@the-moores.org>
> >Reply-To: Rodgers Moore <rodgers@the-moores.org>
> >To: Blade Of Darkness <lm_nguyen@hotmail.com>
> >CC: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >Subject: Re: ISL Trunking vs dot1q
> >Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 11:32:03 -0500
> >
> >If you bring a dot1q trunk to a router, you can't do bridging on any of the
> >vlan interfaces. So if you need bridging, you must use ISL. I found
> >this
> >out two weeks ago, and on a 7206 running IOS 12.1.6 Enterprise.
> >
> >Rodgers Moore
> >
> >Blade Of Darkness wrote:
> >
> > > Group,
> > >
> > > Has anyone experience the pros and cons of isl vs dot1q? I am asking
> >about
> > > performance-wise and all equipments are ciscos. Why would one chose to
> >use
> > > isl instead of dot1q? And can the cisco WS2948G (only G)
> > > use isl? I only see dot1q supported.
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Blades of Darkness.
> > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:29:18 GMT-3