[nsp] (no subject)

[Brian Wallingford]

Considering the flexibility and interoperability of dot1q, we've avoided
ISL.  I wouldn't necessarily consider this a bug (maybe a slight
inconvenience).

In practice, I'd much prefer to let the edge-facing (in this case, likely
a switch port) interface take the brunt of monitoring overhead,
vs. throwing it at a router.   Let the router route.  IMHO, of course.

Bottom line, for the original post, how are your VLANs implemented,
specifically?

You likely won't get a mib as you're asking, as there isn't much demand
for such.

Cheers,
Brian

On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, Darren Ward wrote:

:As we found Cisco does not create unique SNMP ID's for 802.1q logical 
:subinterfaces, they only do it for ISL.
:
:When we logged a feature request we were not given an ETA for inclusion 
:or even if it would ever be :o(
:
:So for interfaces we have to monitor subinterfaces on we still use ISL 
:which will prove to be more difficult in the future as Cisco drops ISL 
:from more and more products to support the standard.
:
:Don't forget you can mix ISL and dot1q on a switch environment. I use 
:ISL as mentioned on router to switch internally and dot1q to clients for 
:standards support.
:
:Haven't hit any problems so far but of course we don't need things like 
:VLAN in VLAN which require dot1q.
:
:Darren
:
:Francesco wrote:
:
:>Does anyone on the list have experience with 802.1q on 75xx GEIP card? In
:>particular I'm interested if I can get traffic MIB per single VLAN.
:>Thanks in advance
:>Francesco