From: Waterman, Roy (Roy.Waterman@colt.net)
Date: Fri Feb 27 2009 - 16:20:03 ARST
You are not the only one who thinks this is incorrect.
Please refer to Tassos's blog post about vtp v2 transparent:
http://ccie-in-3-months.blogspot.com/2008/07/cco-documentation-errors-vt
p-v2.html
Regards
Roy
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Hobbs
Sent: 27 February 2009 15:24
To: ALL From_NJ
Cc: Nadeem Ansari; Jason Morris; Pavel Bykov; Daniel Kutchin; Cisco
certification
Subject: Re: VTP Issue
As far as I can tell domain name must match. You can debug VTP events
with
this:
SW2#debug sw-vlan vtp events
When domain name matches you get this:
00:08:37: VTP LOG RUNTIME: Relaying packet received on trunk Fa0/13 - in
TRANSPARENT MODE (nc = false)
When domain doesn't match, you get this (version 1 or 2)
00:09:23: VTP LOG RUNTIME: Dropping packet received on trunk Fa0/13 -
not in domain ccie
DocCD says this: "Because VTP Version 2 supports only one domain, it
forwards VTP messages in transparent mode without inspecting the version
and domain name."
I don't think this is correct.
-hth
On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 7:38 AM, ALL From_NJ <all.from.nj@gmail.com>
wrote:
> As Daniel and Jason mentioned, run SW4 in transparent mode.
>
> It will forward the vtp announcements from peers, while ignoring the
> contents of these announcements.
>
> Here is a helpful link (watch for the ugly word wrap):
>
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3560/software/rel
> ease/12.2_44_se/configuration/guide/swvtp.html#wp1205076
>
> HTH,
>
> Andrew
>
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 9:10 AM, Nadeem Ansari
> <nadeem.ansari574@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > It is mendatory for switches to be in same VTP domain across entire
> > topology to propogate the VTP advertisement it does not matter
> > wether they are in Server mode or transparent mode, So Case-4
> > conclusion is correct Regards
> > Nadeem
> > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Jason Morris <mcnever@gmail.com>
wrote:
> >
> > > I'm not sure that your Case-4 results are accurate, did you test
> > > it
> with
> > > sw4
> > > in transparent mode? that should allow vtp information to pass
> > > from
> sw1
> > to
> > > sw2
> > >
> > > jason
> > >
> > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Pavel Bykov <slidersv@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > VTP runs in VLAN1, which is not prunnable or removable. Even
> > > > when you remove it administratively from the trunk, in reality
> > > > it will still be operational.
> > > > What is required by vtp is the same domain name and password. If
they
> > > match
> > > > then all modes forward messages.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 10:18 AM, Daniel Kutchin
> > > > <daniel@kutchin.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Naveen -
> > > > >
> > > > > For VTP information to be propagated by SW4, following
> > > > > conditions should be met:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Domain names must match on all Switches
> > > > > 2. Disable Pruning on SW4 (not quite sure of this)
> > > > > 2. SW4 can be in Transparent mode
> > > > >
> > > > > Debugging will be useful here: "debug sw-vlan vtp events"
> > > > >
> > > > > Also view this Video (you need a CCO Account)
> > > > > http://www.cisco.com/warp/customer/473/vtp_flash/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -
> > > > > Daniel
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On
> Behalf
> > > Of
> > > > > naveen M S
> > > > > Sent: Freitag, 27. Februar 2009 09:08
> > > > > To: Cisco certification
> > > > > Subject: Re: VTP Issue
> > > > >
> > > > > Folks,
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is complete results of my experiments. Hope this benefits
> > > > > you.
> > > > >
> > > > > SW1-------SW4--------SW2
> > > > >
> > > > > X,Y,Z = Domain,Mode,Ver
> > > > > Mode 'Any' = client or server or transparent
> > > > >
> > > > > *Case-1)*
> > > > > cisco,Server,2 -------- cisco,Any,2 --------- cisco,Client,2
> > > > >
> > > > > *Result:*
> > > > > Any vlan changes on SW1 is propogated to SW4 and SW2 Note that
> > > > > when both SW1 and SW4 are VTP servers, changes on one server
> > > > > is updated by other server. Also, SW4 does't update Vlan
> > > > > changes while in Transparent mode.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *Case-2)*
> > > > > cisco,Server,2 -------- iewb,Any,2 ---------- cisco,Client,2
> > > > >
> > > > > *Result:*
> > > > > Any vlan changes on SW1 is NOT propogated to SW4 and SW2
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *Case-3)*
> > > > > cisco,Server,1 -------- cisco,Any,1 --------- cisco,Client,1
> > > > >
> > > > > *Result:*
> > > > > Any vlan changes on SW1 is propogated to SW4 and SW2 Note that
> > > > > when both SW1 and SW4 are VTP servers, changes on one server
> > > > > is updated by other server. Also, SW4 does't update Vlan
> > > > > changes while in Transparent mode.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *Case-4)*
> > > > > cisco,Server,2 -------- iewb,Any,2 ---------- cisco,Client,2
> > > > >
> > > > > *Result:*
> > > > > Any vlan changes on SW1 is NOT propogated to SW4 and SW2
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > What bothers me is that how to get VTP updates from SW1 to SW2
> > > > > ? My task doesn't allow me to do Q-in-Q or L2protocol
> > > > > tunnelling.
> > > > >
> > > > > All ideas are welcome.
> > > > > Naveen.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 11:05 PM, naveen M S
> > > > > <navin.ms@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Yes. This is VTP version 2.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Feb 26, 2009 at 10:58 PM, joshua atterbury <
> > > > > > joshuaatterbury@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> are you using vtp version 2?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Fri, Feb 27, 2009 at 5:55 PM, naveen M S
> > > > > >> <navin.ms@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Folks,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Here is my scenario. Seems trivial but can't get it to
> > > > > >>> work.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> SW1-------SW4-------SW2
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> SW1 : VTP domain = cisco, Mode = server
> > > > > >>> SW2 : VTP domain = cisco, Mode = client
> > > > > >>> SW4 : VTP domain = iewb, Mode = server
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> The 802.1q trunk links are established b/n the 3 switches
> > > > > >>> and
> > vlan
> > > 1
> > > > is
> > > > > >>> native on them.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Changes to vlan in SW1 are NOT propogated to SW2. What
> > > > > >>> could be
> > the
> > > > > >>> problem
> > > > > >>> ?
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> *SW1:*
> > > > > >>> interface GigabitEthernet1/0/20
> > > > > >>> switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
> > > > > >>> switchport mode trunk
> > > > > >>> switchport nonegotiate
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> *SW4:*
> > > > > >>> interface GigabitEthernet1/0/14
> > > > > >>> switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
> > > > > >>> switchport mode trunk
> > > > > >>> switchport nonegotiate
> > > > > >>> !
> > > > > >>> interface GigabitEthernet1/0/16
> > > > > >>> switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
> > > > > >>> switchport mode trunk
> > > > > >>> switchport nonegotiate
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> *SW2:*
> > > > > >>> interface GigabitEthernet1/0/19
> > > > > >>> switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
> > > > > >>> switchport mode trunk
> > > > > >>> switchport nonegotiate
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Rack1SW1# sh int trunk
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Port Mode Encapsulation Status
> Native
> > > vlan
> > > > > >>> Gi1/0/20 on 802.1q trunking
1
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Rack1SW4# show int trunk
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Port Mode Encapsulation Status
> Native
> > > vlan
> > > > > >>> Gi1/0/14 on 802.1q trunking
1
> > > > > >>> Gi1/0/16 on 802.1q trunking
1
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Rack1SW2# sh int trunk
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Port Mode Encapsulation Status
> Native
> > > vlan
> > > > > >>> Gi1/0/19 on 802.1q trunking
1
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _
> > > > > >>> Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > > >>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > ___
> > > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > ___
> > > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Pavel Bykov
> > > > ----------------
> > > > Don't forget to help stopping the braindumps, use of which
> > > > reduces
> > value
> > > of
> > > > your certifications. Sign the petition at
> > http://www.stopbraindumps.com/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > > >
> > > >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _
> > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > >
> > >
> > > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________________________
> > > _____
> > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > ___
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Andrew Lee Lissitz
> all.from.nj@gmail.com
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Mar 01 2009 - 09:44:13 ARST