Re: 3 vlans and a problem

Keegan

One of the biggest reasons for using pvlans is subnet conservation. So
yes they can, & should be in the same subnet. Whether they should/
shouldn't intercommunicate is secondary (pardon the pun). Else we
wouldn't have secondary community vlans.

I answered pvlans myself but I also did nt like the tone of the
poster. Whether people respond or not is up to them; berating people
puts people like me off frankly.

Sent from my iPhone

On 15 Nov 2009, at 17:40, <Keegan.Holley_at_sungard.com> wrote:

> Yea but (at least in my experience) they can't be used to bridge
> three
> different vlan's together and allow them to use the same IP range
> freely.
> The whole point of PVLAN is to restrict the communication of hosts
> in the
> same vlan not to allow it. So if everything in every vlan were
> supposed
> to talk freely you could only use one secondary vlan which seems to
> leave
> the other secondary (assuming the first vlan becomes the primary)
> unused.
>
>
>
> From:
> Gary Duncanson <gary.duncanson_at_googlemail.com>
> To:
> <Keegan.Holley_at_sungard.com>
> Cc:
> <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
> Date:
> 11/15/2009 05:52 AM
> Subject:
> Re: 3 vlans and a problem
>
>
>
> Not exactly. Private vlans can be used to achieve a number of
> connectivity/non connectivity results between hosts and not just
> outright
> isolation. You can achieve that with regular vlans.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <Keegan.Holley_at_sungard.com>
> To: "Johnny B CCIE" <jbccie_at_gmail.com>
> Cc: "groupstudy" <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>; <nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 12:00 AM
> Subject: Re: 3 vlans and a problem
>
>
>> It all depends on whether the hosts in the subnet are supposed to be
> able
>> to talk. Private vlans are used to separate things not to connect
>> them
>> together. Can you give us the requirements exactly?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From:
>> Johnny B CCIE <jbccie_at_gmail.com>
>> To:
>> groupstudy <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
>> Date:
>> 11/14/2009 10:03 AM
>> Subject:
>> Re: 3 vlans and a problem
>> Sent by:
>> <nobody_at_groupstudy.com>
>>
>>
>>
>> So far 2 ccies have come to the same conclusion of private vlans
>> maybe
>> I was not clear enough with the question but I reworded my query very
>> closely to the original question. I am not asking questions I do not
>> already have an answer for by the way. I merely am starting a review
>> of things I want to know perfectly before my trip to the lab.
>>
>> I suppose we can use private vlans to apply the same subnet mask but
>> we would have achieved the exact opposite of the desired outcome for
>> this question. So private vlans will achieve the the lab requirement
>> to allow all three vlans to use the same subnet however 0 points will
>> be awarded for the task. Maybe there will be points awarded for
>> re-grade or maybe not. Anyone want to try again?
>>
>> On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Johnny B CCIE <jbccie_at_gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> Let's say I have 3 vlans (10, 20, and 30).
>>> Let's say I have a lab requirement to configure all three vlans to
>>> use
>>> the same subnet: 172.16.10.0/24 (for each vlan).
>>>
>>> What options are available to make these three vlans appear to be in
>>> the same subnet?
>>
>>
>> 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

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Sun Nov 15 2009 - 19:27:12 ART