From: emad (emad@zakq8.com)
Date: Thu Aug 28 2003 - 05:09:22 GMT-3
Exactly Larry , that was my opinion to the customer but he insisted that
we can work around this ,anyway that is the attitude of all customers
but I have one more question if u all please,
Is there , from technical point of view , anyway to configure one vlans
with two subnets?
thanx
-----Original Message-----
From: Larry Letterman [mailto:lletterm@cisco.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 11:05 AM
To: 'emad'; 'Gary Bartlett'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Vlan design vs. subnet distribution
All the ports on all switches would be in the same vlan..since you only
plan
On using one subnet..having more than one vlan wont work, since there
are no
Subnets to assign to the other vlans..
If you want to use more than one IP subnet and more than one vlan, then
break the
Subnet into smaller pieces and use interface vlans on the router, then
trunk those
Vlans to the switches and each vlan will have a different subnet and the
L3 device
Would route between them..and the trunks will carry all the vlan data to
all the vlans
Configured on each switch...
Larry Letterman
Cisco Systems
-----Original Message-----
From: emad [mailto:emad@zakq8.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 12:58 AM
To: 'Gary Bartlett'; 'Larry Letterman'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Vlan design vs. subnet distribution
Importance: High
Then , I will put all sites in one subnet and different vlans , what is
the benefit from applying vlan here at this time , and I think I should
define vlan interfaces on the core switch and give them IPs , how can I
put IP on a L3 device to route between and all these IPs are in the same
subnet , or I shouldn't define vlan interfaces at all on the core ,
Please when proposing an idea explain it in more details for me thanx
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Bartlett [mailto:gary.bartlett@consultant.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 10:51 AM
To: emad; 'Larry Letterman'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Vlan design vs. subnet distribution
In a case like that you just need to setup a trunk, traffic will
automaticly pass within the same vlan across all sites
----- Original Message -----
From: "emad" <emad@zakq8.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 10:37:27 +0300
To: "''Larry Letterman''" <lletterm@cisco.com>, "''Gary Bartlett''"
<gary.bartlett@consultant.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Subject: RE: Vlan design vs. subnet distribution
>
> 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
> >
> >
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Sep 02 2003 - 18:54:08 GMT-3