DOT1q tunnels with etherchannel

From: Dennis Worth (dennis.worth@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Mar 05 2009 - 16:03:50 ARST

Next message: Edouard Zorrilla: "Re: Advanced Nat Question"
Previous message: Edouard Zorrilla: "Re: NAT-ASA-Juniper Security"
Next in thread: Sadiq Yakasai: "Re: DOT1q tunnels with etherchannel"
Maybe reply: Sadiq Yakasai: "Re: DOT1q tunnels with etherchannel"
Maybe reply: Dennis Worth: "Re: DOT1q tunnels with etherchannel"
Maybe reply: ALL From_NJ: "Re: DOT1q tunnels with etherchannel"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Hey group,
I have a quick query with regards to why 2 separate vlans are required on
the provider side of dot1q tunnels when using ether channel. If anyone has a
document on this, that would be great. See Below for diagram.

SW3 --- SW4
| |
| |
SW1 --- SW2

Switch 3 and for are aggregating 2 ports and the tunnel runs between edge
on sw1 and sw2. The problem is that each interface connected to the customer
switches needs a separate access vlan. Why is this? What underlying theme is
there? I tried to debug the l2protocol-tunnel but with no success.

Thanks,

-- Dennis Worth

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net

Next message: Edouard Zorrilla: "Re: Advanced Nat Question"
Previous message: Edouard Zorrilla: "Re: NAT-ASA-Juniper Security"
Next in thread: Sadiq Yakasai: "Re: DOT1q tunnels with etherchannel"
Maybe reply: Sadiq Yakasai: "Re: DOT1q tunnels with etherchannel"
Maybe reply: Dennis Worth: "Re: DOT1q tunnels with etherchannel"
Maybe reply: ALL From_NJ: "Re: DOT1q tunnels with etherchannel"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Apr 06 2009 - 06:44:04 ART