[c-nsp] Vlan interface vs. sub-interface

[David Coulson]

One of the big advantages of sub-interfaces over VLAN interfaces is that 
if 'VLAN 100' on one port is a totally different network to 'VLAN 100' 
on another. Using a sub-interface you can configure them as unique L3 
interfaces. I've done this a lot with dot1q handoffs, and it works nicely.

Is there a mechanism in place for QinQ mappings to a SVI? Never really 
dealt with that before, but now I'm curious.

David

Nate wrote:
> I'm trying to put together a table of advantages (and disadvantages)
> of a vlan interface (SVI) vs. a sub-interface of a physical port. So
> far, I have the following.
>
> SVI
> ----
> Advantage:
> -Ability to add redundant link to the L3 interface
> -Better counter and statistics displayed through CLI
>
> Disadvantage:
> -Need to be mindful of Spanning Tree issues on redundant links
> -The number of SVI supported maybe limited dependent on platform?
>
>
>
> Physical port sub-interface
> ---------------------------------
> Advantage:
> -Easier to configure and supported on more platforms?
>
>
> Disadvantage:
> -Inability to add L2 redundant links
> -Statistics on CLI limited
> -Bandwidth limited to physical port
>
>
> Are there more significant advantages/disadvantages (e.g. buffer
> limit, queue depth) that I'm missing?
>
> Thanks,
> Nate
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>