RE: Special Vlans - should or should NOT include

From: Popgeorgiev Nikolay (nikolay.popgeorgiev@siemens.com)
Date: Fri Jun 09 2006 - 04:38:38 ART

• Next message: johngibson1541@yahoo.com: "Hotel Internet telnet"
• Previous message: Koen Zeilstra: "Re: RSVP & LLQ for voice"
• Maybe in reply to: Popgeorgiev Nikolay: "Special Vlans - should or should NOT include"
• Next in thread: Guyler, Rik: "RE: Special Vlans - should or should NOT include"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Hello Carlos,

I think also te same but I just wanted to be confirmed. Maybe it is a question for the proctor.

Best,
Nick

-----Original Message-----
From: Carlos Campos Torres (ccampost) [mailto:ccampost@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, June 09, 2006 4:37 AM
To: Popgeorgiev Nikolay; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Special Vlans - should or should NOT include

I think you shouldn't use them. Why would you want to though?
VTP and STP traffic will get forwarded anyway and token ring and fddi
vlans are not really needed

Please let me know if somebody thinks different on this one

Carlos
 

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Popgeorgiev Nikolay
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 3:03 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Special Vlans - should or should NOT include

 Dear all,

I have a doubt about when the task requires to allow only the used vlans
over the trunk link(s), should I include also vlan 1 and vlans from 1002
- 1005. Do we really need them.

Thanks
Nick

• Next message: johngibson1541@yahoo.com: "Hotel Internet telnet"
• Previous message: Koen Zeilstra: "Re: RSVP & LLQ for voice"
• Maybe in reply to: Popgeorgiev Nikolay: "Special Vlans - should or should NOT include"
• Next in thread: Guyler, Rik: "RE: Special Vlans - should or should NOT include"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 01 2006 - 07:57:32 ART