ISL or Dot1Q

From: Nitro Drops (nitrodrops@hotmail.com)
Date: Wed Dec 17 2008 - 00:10:57 ARST

Next message: Dale Shaw: "Re: Maybe a bit off topic"
Previous message: Narbik Kocharians: "Re: Narbik's IPV6 Lab2 from Adv. Workbook"
Next in thread: Hobbs: "Re: ISL or Dot1Q"
Maybe reply: Hobbs: "Re: ISL or Dot1Q"
Maybe reply: Jonny English: "Re: ISL or Dot1Q"
Maybe reply: Fahad Khan: "Re: ISL or Dot1Q"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Hi All,

Task - All traffic sent over these trunks should be tagged with an open
standard VLAN Header.

QNS - Should i be using (i) ISL or (ii) Dot1q + tag native vlan?

Both methods will make all traffic tagged?

Solution is using ISL. But i beg to differ.

Based on Cisco text.

ISL - Adds a 26 byte header plus a new trailer , encapsulating the original
frame
802.1Q - Inserts a 4byte header, called a tag, into the original frame

I always go for key-words such as tag or encaps. Thus based on this task, it
should be using 802.1Q.

Cheers
Nit

Next message: Dale Shaw: "Re: Maybe a bit off topic"
Previous message: Narbik Kocharians: "Re: Narbik's IPV6 Lab2 from Adv. Workbook"
Next in thread: Hobbs: "Re: ISL or Dot1Q"
Maybe reply: Hobbs: "Re: ISL or Dot1Q"
Maybe reply: Jonny English: "Re: ISL or Dot1Q"
Maybe reply: Fahad Khan: "Re: ISL or Dot1Q"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 01 2009 - 12:53:08 ARST