From: Gary Bartlett (gary.bartlett@consultant.com)
Date: Thu Aug 28 2003 - 04:14:11 GMT-3
Well, I think you were on the right track by saying that for routing purpoces it wouldn't work to well if you had multiple sites advertiseing the same subnet, unless the subnets were NATed by the router as it was advertised to the rest of the network...
----- Original Message -----
From: "emad" <emad@zakq8.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 09:59:31 +0300
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Subject: Vlan design vs. subnet distribution
> Folks,
> I faced a question saying why it is necessary to dedicate one subnet per
> each vlan and not more when we are connecting , as example , two branch
> sites switches to the core switch?
> My answer was to how we can give IP to each vlan interface on the core
> switch to make L3 routing between them and at the same time we limited
> the boradcast traffic to inside the same site, but if I have three
> sites(one head quarter and other two are branches) have one subnet in
> between them ?
> Like if I have subnet 172.30.16.0 255.255.248.0 distributed between the
> three sites , how can I make vlans without having each site separated
> into one subnet!!!
>
> Please advice
>
> thanx
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Sep 02 2003 - 18:54:08 GMT-3