[c-nsp] L2/L3 configuration question

[Wojtek Zlobicki]

Why bother with L3 at all.  I would just configure the two ports as L2
only and to the 6500's this pretty much looks like a direct IP link. 
Why have an inferior device [the 3508] make routing decisions [no
matter how basic ].



On 5/10/05, Tim Winders <twinders at southplainscollege.edu> wrote:
> I have a question about configuration best practices for the following
> situation:
> 
> 6509/Sup720 ------  3508G-XL  -------- 6509/Sup720
> 
> I have two 6509/Sup720 switches connected together through a 3508G switch.
> Due to some physical limitations I cannot connect the 6509/Sup720s directly
> together.
> 
> I do not need to pass VLANs between the two switches.  I would like to
> assign the 3508G an IP address so it can be managed.  What is the best
> configuration setup for this scenario to simply route between the two
> 6509/Sup720s?
> 
> What is the 3508G was replaced with a 3550?  Would that change the
> configuration?
> 
> ---
> 
> Tim Winders
> Associate Dean of Information Technology
> South Plains College
> Levelland, TX 79336
> 
> Problem replying to my email?  Click the "Sign" button in the OE toolbar or,
> better yet, get your own FREE Personal E-Mail Digital ID:
> http://www.thawte.com/email/index.html
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> 
> 
> 


-- 
----------------------------------------
wojtek.zlobicki at gmail.com