From: ccie2be (ccie2be@nyc.rr.com)
Date: Thu May 12 2005 - 18:52:37 GMT-3
Hey Rolando,
I like that idea. I can't try it though because it can't configure the
ethernet interfaces on the rtr's with trunks.
But, let's suppose I could do that.
What would happen when a bcast frame from rtr-1 reached Cat-1?
How would Cat-1 process that frame?
Thanks for thinking about this.
Tim
_____
From: Alvarez, Rolando [NCSUS] [mailto:RAlvare5@NCSUS.JNJ.COM]
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 5:31 PM
To: 'ccie2be'
Subject: RE: Same subnet, different vlans
Tim,
I haven't studied in a while, so I am a little rusty, but what if you made
the native vlan on either side of the trunk to correspond with the vlan the
router connects to. In other words, on Cat1, make vlan2 the native vlan of
the trunk, and on cat2 make vlan20 the native vlan. In other words, let one
vlan 'leak' in to the other. Let me know if that works.
Rolando
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
ccie2be
Sent: Thursday, May 12, 2005 5:14 PM
To: Group Study
Subject: Same subnet, different vlans
Hey guys,
I'm stumped on this one.
Here's the scenario:
rtr-1 ------------- Cat-1 --- Cat-2 ----------------- rtr-2
.2 < vlan 2 > < vlan 20> .254
| < 192.10.1.x/24 >|
As you can see, both routers are in the same subnet but the ports they
connect to are assigned to different vlan's.
There's an 802.1q trunk connecting the Cat's.
Broadcast traffic from rtr-1 should reach rtr-2 and vice versa.
I thought about 802.1q tunneling and fallback bridging but neither approach
seems to work or be the right way to approach this.
Anyone have any ideas?
TIA, Tim
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 03 2005 - 10:11:57 GMT-3