we do support 802.1Q on the FE I/O module. i forget what release/feature
set the support was added in. if you are interested, let me know
and i will find out
you get an encap fail when there is no L3 to L2 mapping. looks like
we don't have an arp entry for the end device for some reason. run
debug arp, are we getting an arp response?
is it possibly for you to span the port and put a sniffer on it to see
what is happening during the arp mechanism? or if you remove ISL/dot1Q
from the picture, does everything work?
cheers
.siva
>
> The configuration you show should work for interfaces that support dot1q.
> The single FE port I/O module for the 7200 doesn't support dot1q to my
> memory, but does support ISL (I have a setup running it right now).
>
> I would check on the Cat side and make sure that it is recognizing that the
> port is a trunk port. Possibly you need to hardcode the config:
>
> set trunk 1/1 on isl 1-1005
>
> And confirm that the VLAN's in question are active on the switch.
>
> Baring that, I would suggest setting an encapsulation on the .1 interface
> just to be safe.
>
> What version of IOS are you running?
>
> David
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dmitri Kalintsev [mailto:dek@hades.uz]
> Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2001 1:21 PM
> To: cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net
> Subject: [nsp] dot1q/isl "encapsulation failed"
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I'm having rather hard time finding what's wrong in seemingly stupid
> situation:
>
> !
> interface FastEthernet0/0
> ip address <real ip address> 255.255.255.128
> no ip directed-broadcast
> full-duplex
> !
> interface FastEthernet0/0.1
> no ip redirects
> no ip directed-broadcast
> !
> interface FastEthernet0/0.77
> encapsulation dot1Q 77
> ip address 10.1.1.5 255.255.255.252
> no ip directed-broadcast
> !
>
> (I've tried no ip address on maininterface and f0/0.1 in dit1q vlan 1,
> result is the same).
>
> 7206-vpn-test#ping 10.1.1.6
>
> Type escape sequence to abort.
> Sending 5, 100-byte ICMP Echos to 10.1.1.6, timeout is 2 seconds:
>
> 19:41:37: IP: s=10.1.1.5 (local), d=10.1.1.6 (FastEthernet0/0.77), len 100,
> sending
> 19:41:37: IP: s=10.1.1.5 (local), d=10.1.1.6 (FastEthernet0/0.77), len 100,
> encapsulation failed.
> 19:41:39: IP: s=10.1.1.5 (local), d=10.1.1.6 (FastEthernet0/0.77), len 100,
> sending
> 19:41:39: IP: s=10.1.1.5 (local), d=10.1.1.6 (FastEthernet0/0.77), len 100,
> encapsulation failed.
> 19:41:41: IP: s=10.1.1.5 (local), d=10.1.1.6 (FastEthernet0/0.77), len 100,
> sending
> 19:41:41: IP: s=10.1.1.5 (local), d=10.1.1.6 (FastEthernet0/0.77), len 100,
> encapsulation failed.
> 19:41:43: IP: s=10.1.1.5 (local), d=10.1.1.6 (FastEthernet0/0.77), len 100,
> sending
> 19:41:43: IP: s=10.1.1.5 (local), d=10.1.1.6 (FastEthernet0/0.77), len 100,
> encapsulation failed.
> 19:41:45: IP: s=10.1.1.5 (local), d=10.1.1.6 (FastEthernet0/0.77), len 100,
> sending
> 19:41:45: IP: s=10.1.1.5 (local), d=10.1.1.6 (FastEthernet0/0.77), len 100,
> encapsulation failed.
> Success rate is 0 percent (0/5)
>
> I've tried to change dot1q to ISL, and result is the same, "encapsulation
> failed". FE works fine, if I don't use VLAN's. I've tried different IOS
> sets, too. Oh, yes. And a different router. First was 7206vxr with npe300
> and dual FE IO controller, this current one is 7206 with npe200 and vanilla
> IO controller. No difference.
>
> Switch side I presume is not guilty, as this very same switch runs a few
> dot1 trunks to other switches without problem. Switch is Cat2948, so it only
> supports dot1q trunks. Switch and router perfectly see each other on cdp
> neighbor list, too.
>
> 7206-vpn-test#sh int f0/0.77
> FastEthernet0/0.77 is up, line protocol is up
> Hardware is DEC21140A, address is 0004.de2f.8000 (bia 0004.de2f.8000)
> Internet address is 10.1.1.5/30
> MTU 1500 bytes, BW 100000 Kbit, DLY 100 usec,
> reliability 255/255, txload 1/255, rxload 1/255
> Encapsulation 802.1Q Virtual LAN, Vlan ID 77.
> ARP type: ARPA, ARP Timeout 04:00:00
>
> It seem to recognize that it's a VLAN interface, too...
>
> There is nothing really I can think of now, and what the hell should I think
> of? This is a simple configuration, as simple as it gets, and I had it
> working in dozens of other places. :( Any ideas?
>
> SY,
> --
> D.K.
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:31 EDT