From: emad (emad@zakq8.com)
Date: Thu Aug 28 2003 - 05:01:47 GMT-3
At the end of the day , I want to put each site in one separate vlan?
Not only one vlan ,
Please advice
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Letterman [mailto:lletterm@cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:59 AM
To: 'emad'; 'Gary Bartlett'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Vlan design vs. subnet distribution
Setup trunks between the switches and make the main site
The spantree root. And then insert all the ports in the vlan
That you want to use for the users. That will get you everyone on
One flat layer 2 network across 3 switches....
Larry Letterman
Cisco Systems
-----Original Message-----
From: emad [mailto:emad@zakq8.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 12:37 AM
To: 'Larry Letterman'; 'Gary Bartlett'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Vlan design vs. subnet distribution
Importance: High
The case exactly is I have three or more sites connected through edge
switch to the core switch (4507) through fiber links but all these sites
share the subnet 172.30.16.0 mask 255.255.248.0 , how can I implement
vlans between these sites with the existing subnet range right there.
Please advice
-----Original Message-----
From: emad [mailto:emad@zakq8.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:22 AM
To: 'Larry Letterman'; 'Gary Bartlett'; 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
Subject: RE: Vlan design vs. subnet distribution
Importance: High
Larry , u didn't get my point at all
All these sites are connected by fiber to the core switch , all the
network around are flat network (one broadcast domain) no L3 routers in
between , u got it now?
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Letterman [mailto:lletterm@cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:19 AM
To: 'Gary Bartlett'; 'emad'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Vlan design vs. subnet distribution
I raelly don't see what vlans have to do with connecting remote
Sites, since most remotes are connected by routers with L3 subnets Using
/30 space. The most common way of connecting remotes to the main Site on
one subnet would be multipoint frame...
Larry Letterman
Cisco Systems
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Gary Bartlett
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 12:14 AM
To: emad; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Vlan design vs. subnet distribution
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