From: John (jgarrison1@austin.rr.com)
Date: Wed Jun 18 2008 - 10:38:25 ART
If the limitation is just lacp then you can use mode on, and the
port-channel will not use lacp or pagp to negotiate the link
----- Original Message -----
From: "Akhtar Rasool" <akhtar.samo@gmail.com>
To: "Cisco certification" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 2:01 AM
Subject: Private Vlan limitation
> Hi,
>
> I am planning to use private vlans for customer webservers in DMZ &
> CAT6509
> is having an L2 trunk(port channel) to a non-Cisco Firewall. Since there
> is
> a limitation not to configure private vlans using LaCP/EtherChannel, how
> would I define a promiscuous port in this scenario so that private vlan to
> primary vlan translation could happen...
>
> In this case can L3 switching would happen b/w private vlans ??
>
> Any help & best practice suggesstion would be appreciable.
> **************************************************************************************
> vlan 500
> name WEB-H_Community
> private-vlan community
>
> vtp mode transparent
>
> interface GigabitEthernet2/6
> description ***** Web hosting Windows *****
> switchport
> switchport private-vlan host-association 256 500
> switchport mode private-vlan host
> no ip address
> spanning-tree portfast
> !
>
> C6509#show vlan private-vlan
>
> Primary Secondary Type Ports
> ------- --------- -----------------
> ------------------------------------------
> 256 500 community Gi2/6
>
> ****************************************************************************
> CAT6509)<----L2 Trunk + Port Channel------->(non-Cisco FW w/ L3 interface
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Akhtar
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jul 01 2008 - 06:23:22 ART