Re: DTP - Interpreting the Question

I agree with Leonardo 100%. If you were going to connect two switches via a
trunk link and before you cabled it up, you added the "switchport
nonegotiate" command, yes, that would stop the trunking protocol
negotiation.

The only way that the switchport nonegotiate command would not stop a trunk
link from negotiating would be if you added that command after your trunks
have already gone through the negotiation process. Because the switches
have already negotiated which trunking protocol that they're going to use,
adding the "switchport nonegotiate" will not effect anything.

Lab it up =).

Edwin

On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 4:19 PM, Leonardo Hideki
<leohideki.ccie_at_gmail.com>wrote:

> Hi Roy,
>
> I thought of that also, but disabling DTP wouldn't prevent SW2 from
> learning
> which encap type it should use as well?
>
> Rgrds,
>
> Leonardo Hideki
>
>
>
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Roy Khan <roykhan123_at_hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Hi Guys
> >
> > Perfect solution Just I add one more command
> >
> > int fax/x
> > > switchport trunk encap dot1q
> > > switchport mode trunk
> > *Switchport Nonegotiate *
> > when you type show int trunk command on this switch you will see Mode is
> > -On- it and Encapsulation means
> > you statically configure the trunk.
> > also use *show int Fax/x switchport* command to verify this.
> > Remember 3560 default mode is switchport dynamic auto.
> >
> > Br
> >
> > Roy
> >
> >
> > > Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 06:24:37 -0300
> > > Subject: Re: DTP - Interpreting the Question
> > > From: leohideki.ccie_at_gmail.come
> > > To: mitsuie2_at_gmail.com
> > > CC: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> >
> > >
> > > Hi Sud,
> > >
> > > As SW1 should not negotiate, you should configure dot1q / trunk
> > statically:
> > >
> > > !
> > > int fax/x
> > > switchport trunk encap dot1q
> > > switchport mode trunk
> > > !
> > >
> > > On SW2, it could be either desirable or auto, since SW1 is statically
> > > configured to trunk.
> > >
> > > !
> > > int fax/x
> > > switchport mode dynamic [auto | desirable]
> > > !
> > >
> > > In order to check this config, issue a "sh int trunk" on both sides. On
> > > switch 1, it should come up with "802.1q" while on switch 2, it should
> > come
> > > up with "n-802.1q", "n" meaning that the trunking protocol was
> > negotiated.
> > >
> > > HTH.
> > >
> > > Rgrds,
> > >
> > > Leonardo Hideki
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 4:28 AM, Sud Mu <mitsuie2_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi All,
> > > >
> > > > I've got a problem in interpreting this DTP question
> > > >
> > > > If there was a question where SW1 and SW2 are directly connected.
> > > >
> > > > Question:
> > > > =======
> > > > Link between SW1 and SW2 should be a 802.1q trunk. SW1's port should
> be
> > > > configured statically to have 802.1q trunking. SW2 should negotiate
> > 802.1q
> > > > as trunking protocol to SW1. SW1 should not negotiate 802.1q to SW2.
> > > >
> > > > Where should I put "switchport mode dynamic desirable" ? on SW1 or
> SW2
> > ?
> > > >
> > > > Although simple please give you experts idea
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Sud
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > 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 Thu May 19 2011 - 17:01:36 ART