From: Wade Edwards (wade.edwards@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Dec 19 2001 - 13:55:36 GMT-3
But still does not make sense to artificially limit ISL also. I'm sure
I can put an ISL formatted packet on the line if I had a packet driver
on a PC with a 10Mb Ethernet NIC. I think this is more of a design
consideration than a physical limitation. Of course if they say it only
supports 100Mb and limit it in software to only support 100Mb interfaces
then people will be forced to buy routers with FastEthernet interfaces
which are more expensive than Ethernet interfaces but have a higher
margin. Sorry that was the conspiracist in me talking.
There all out to get us and I am not paranoid.
L8r.
-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Ezerski [mailto:jezerski@broadcom.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 10:26 AM
To: Wade Edwards; 'fwells12'; 'Ryaboy Vadim'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Trunking with 2901 switch
The funny part is, when all of us were studying for our CCNAs, and
CCNPs, the books always hyped ISL and downplayed dot1q. They also
always said, "with ISL you must always use a 100MB Ethernet interfaces".
I think the limitation is in ISL and not in Dot1Q. I am not sure. I
have not tried to trunk ISL on an 10-ethernet port.
-Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: Wade Edwards [mailto:wade.edwards@powerupnetworks.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2001 7:10 AM
To: Joseph Ezerski; fwells12; Ryaboy Vadim; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Trunking with 2901 switch
There is nothing different from a 10Mb Ethernet interface and 100Mb
Ethernet interface when it comes to being able to use trunking. If a
100Mb Ethernet interface can add the 802.1q tags to a packet and send it
out on the wire so can a 10Mb Ethernet interface. It just means that
anything on that wire needs to understand the 802.1q tags or they will
get very confused. I never could understand the Cisco limitation that
only 100Mb and faster Ethernet interfaces could support trunking.
L8r.
-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Ezerski [mailto:jezerski@broadcom.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 7:22 PM
To: 'fwells12'; 'Ryaboy Vadim'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Trunking with 2901 switch
I beg to differ. You used to be right. However, someone posted here
awhile
back about trunking on a 10Base interface, using dot1q. We were curious
enough to duplicate this in our lab....and it worked. It floored me.
So,
you can trunk on 10base ethernet interfaces. There may be some code
minimums there, like enterprise, etc. I would have to ask my co-worker
which version he used. Of course, CCO has zero documentation on this
and
always refers to using Fast Ethernet ports to trunk.
-Joe
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
fwells12
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:19 PM
To: Ryaboy Vadim; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Trunking with 2901 switch
2501 will not trunk. You will need a 2620 at minimum. Trnking requires
a
100Mb ethernet interface.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryaboy Vadim" <VRyaboy@acuson.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2001 3:05 PM
Subject: Trunking with 2901 switch
> Is it possible to set trunking between 2901 switch and 2501 router ?
>
> Can not get trunking to work. It shows status not-trunking.
>
> I've tried different ports, read all groupstudy and cisco
>
> web site ,but could not find relevant info.
>
> Seems 2901 is limited in trunk setup. But it has set trunk command.
So,
>
> it should be possible to set up trunking, right?
>
> Any comments, examples ?
>
> Anybody successfully configured router-on-stick with 2901 and 2500
series
> router?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:32:45 GMT-3