From: Kian Wah, Lai (kian_wah@qala.com.sg)
Date: Wed Oct 20 2004 - 11:52:55 GMT-3
Since VLAN maps have no direction (so they're applied to incoming and
outgoing), I'm quite sure they can be applied to both switches.
What does the rest think?
You can try it out and see if it works since you have rack time now :)
Regards,
Kian Wah
Singapore Cisco User Group
http://www.sgcug.org
3 routers + one PIX rental at SGD2/hr or USD1.30/hr
http://rack.sgcug.org
Good for testing or practicing.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
ccie2be
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2004 10:07 PM
To: Group Study
Subject: 3550 vlan maps
Hi guys,
I think this is an interesting question.
Here's the topology:
/ R2
BB2 ---- sw2 --trunk--sw1
\ R3
BB2, R2, and R3 are all in the same vlan and all running RIP.
SW1 and SW2 are trunked together; BB2 is connected to SW2 while both R2 and
R3
are connected to SW1.
I want to prevent RIP updates from BB2 to R2 and R3.
I created the following vlan map.
vlan access-map BLOCK-RIP 10
action drop
match ip address NO-RIP-BB2
vlan access-map BLOCK-RIP 20
action forward
vlan filter BLOCK-RIP vlan-list 232
ip access-list extended NO-RIP-BB2
permit udp host 192.10.3.254 eq rip any
Note that 192.10.3.254 is the address of BB2.
Here's the question:
On which 3550 should this vlan map be configured on? Does it matter? If
so,
why?
To me, it seems that it would be OK to have this vlan on either sw1 or sw2,
but I wanted to hear from anyone who disagrees or someone who can confirm my
thinking.
Thanks, Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 06 2004 - 17:11:50 GMT-3