RE: pVLANs question (cross-customer connectivity problem)

From: Andrew Fort (afort@staff.webcentral.com.au)
Date: Thu Jun 28 2001 - 21:10:23 EDT


this brings me to my 2900XL series rant:

The WS-C2924XL is a very capable little switch (for the money).

But why, Cisco, do you force us to use VTP transparent on these
access-cabinet/wiring-closet switches when we have more than 64 VLANs in our
VTP domain. Why are these switches not able to keep 256 VLANs in their
vlan.dat/VTP table? It looks like an intentional crippling. Sure, we can
buy 2924-XL-M to get 256 VLANs in the vlan.dat/VTP, but that's 2RU, or a
3254XL, but it is too expensive to put into hundreds of racks when the
majority of switching is out an etherchannel on the switch (i.e., backplane
bandwidth is not a consideration), from customers out to the core.

I'd like to be able to use VTP to prune my trunks to help with broadcast
domain limitation and to make it straightforward to administer VLANs
throughout the network from our core Cat6500s, but cisco crippled a key edge
switch in any such plan. why?

<end rant>
.afort

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Andrew Fort
>Sent: Friday, 29 June 2001 10:54 AM
>To: 'Eric L. Howard'; cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
>Subject: RE: pVLANs question (cross-customer connectivity problem)
>
>
>Yes, you can do private vlan edge ports on a 2924XL, i.e., an
>8MB switch,
>with 12.0(5)XU software or later.
>
>http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/c2900xl/29_
35xu/scg/kico
nfig.htm#xtocid57492

this feature isn't available on the older (longer chassis) 2924 (non-XL,
4MB). the older switch just says "2900" on the front, the new one says
"2900XL" (and is notably more compact, about 120mm shorter).

>From: Eric L. Howard [mailto:elh@outreachnetworks.com]
>Sent: Friday, 29 June 2001 4:18 AM
>To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
>Subject: Re: pVLANs question (cross-customer connectivity problem)
>
>
>Anyone know of a way to do something similar w/ a lowly 2924?
>
> ~ELH~
>
>At a certain time, now past, Desmarais, Jonathan spake thusly:
>> This is how we acheive the layer-2 seperation of Hosted
>customers in our
>> IDC's.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:43 EDT