<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";}
p.MsoAcetate, li.MsoAcetate, div.MsoAcetate
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:8.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;}
span.BalloonTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Balloon Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Balloon Text";
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle23
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle24
{mso-style-type:personal;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle25
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>OK so instead of using the “no switchport” command on the interface to turn it into a routed port you assign the vlan to the port on the access switch. Trunk the VLAN up to the core and then give the SVI the /30 of that VLAN. The VLAN is only used for the VG port. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca] <br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, January 26, 2012 9:05 AM<br><b>To:</b> Bill Riley<br><b>Cc:</b> Cisco List VoIP<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cisco-voip] ISR/VG Ethernet redundancy<o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>Each interface has a separate /30 network. <br><br>We were considering using one network for the "left" side, and one for the "right" side, however, there would have to be more work involved to filter out traffic so VG224s didn't end up routing traffic for other devices, since they're valid EIGRP neighbours. We took the easy way out.<br><br>I'm sure with some thinking you could do it with two larger networks, one for left, one for right.<br><br>The route points are on the VG224 and the core switches. The access layer switches are simply layer 2 transport (VLAN).<br><br>---<br>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (ANNU)<br>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it. <br> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)<br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'><hr size=2 width="100%" align=center id=zwchr></span></div><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>"Bill Riley" <bill@hitechconnection.net><br><b>To: </b>"Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio@uoguelph.ca><br><b>Cc: </b>"Cisco List VoIP" <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net><br><b>Sent: </b>Thursday, January 26, 2012 9:59:51 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>RE: [cisco-voip] ISR/VG Ethernet redundancy<br><br><br><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>So in the diagram below do you have a separate network for each interface on the VG or are you creating a bridge interface on the VG?</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'> Lelio Fulgenzi [mailto:lelio@uoguelph.ca] <br><b>Sent:</b> Thursday, January 26, 2012 8:56 AM<br><b>To:</b> Bill Riley<br><b>Cc:</b> Cisco List VoIP<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cisco-voip] ISR/VG Ethernet redundancy</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>Ideally, we would have each VG224 hooked up directly to a core switch (no distribution layer here), however, there are not enough ports on it, so we created a VLAN for each network segment on two switch stacks, each with dual links to the distribution layer. The VG224 has a link to each stack.<br><br>So something like this:<br><br><img width=400 height=400 id="_x0000_i1026" src="cid:image001.png@01CCDC09.F300E400"><br><br>---<br>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (ANNU)<br>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it. <br> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'><hr size=2 width="100%" align=center></span></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>"Bill Riley" <bill@hitechconnection.net><br><b>To: </b>"Eric Pedersen" <PedersenE@bennettjones.com>, "Lelio Fulgenzi" <lelio@uoguelph.ca>, "Jason Burns" <burns.jason@gmail.com><br><b>Cc: </b>"Cisco List VoIP" <cisco-voip@puck.nether.net><br><b>Sent: </b>Thursday, January 26, 2012 8:23:17 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>RE: [cisco-voip] ISR/VG Ethernet redundancy<br><br></span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>For those that are running a routing protocol on your VG224 or ISR used as a voice gateway do you have them dual uplinked? It’s great that you have a routing protocol running in the event the L3 path changes but what about the physical uplink from the VG to the switches? Do you have that dual connected? Are you using either channel or are your running multiple L3 subnets on each interface? </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'> cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Eric Pedersen<br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2012 4:04 PM<br><b>To:</b> Lelio Fulgenzi; Jason Burns<br><b>Cc:</b> Cisco List VoIP<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cisco-voip] ISR/VG Ethernet redundancy</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>We're running OSPF on our VG224s and ISR PRI gateways for uplink redundancy with no issues so far. It's nice to have the routing protocol intelligence to handle upstream failures.</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Eric</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'> </span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in'><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'> cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Lelio Fulgenzi<br><b>Sent:</b> 25 January 2012 1:19 PM<br><b>To:</b> Jason Burns<br><b>Cc:</b> Cisco List VoIP<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [cisco-voip] ISR/VG Ethernet redundancy</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>We ended up going the route of EIGRP routing on the VG224s and 3800s. <br><br>Unfortunately, we got some not so positive feedback regarding the supportedness of EIGRP on VG224s, but like you found out, no real direction on how to configure redundancy on these.<br><br>I'm far less concerned with a port going down than a switch, so having the VG224s uplinked to different switches is our choice.<br><br>Lelio<br><br><br>---<br>Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.<br>Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1<br>(519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (ANNU)<br>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^<br>Cooking with unix is easy. You just sed it and forget it. <br> - LFJ (with apologies to Mr. Popeil)</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'><hr size=2 width="100%" align=center></span></div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>From: </span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>"Jason Burns" <<a href="mailto:burns.jason@gmail.com" target="_blank">burns.jason@gmail.com</a>><br><b>To: </b>"Bill Riley" <<a href="mailto:bill@hitechconnection.net" target="_blank">bill@hitechconnection.net</a>><br><b>Cc: </b>"Cisco List VoIP" <<a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a>><br><b>Sent: </b>Wednesday, January 25, 2012 3:12:26 PM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: [cisco-voip] ISR/VG Ethernet redundancy<br><br>I second Etherchannel from the upstream device. I had a customer who insisted on binding to the PortChannel interface for the voice protocols, even though we recommended using the Loopback. It's up and running just fine and does handle failure of a single link as expected.<br><br>-Jason</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>On Wed, Jan 25, 2012 at 3:07 PM, Bill Riley <<a href="mailto:bill@hitechconnection.net" target="_blank">bill@hitechconnection.net</a>> wrote:</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'>You should use a loop back and bind everything to in instead of the physical<br>interface.<br><br>If you want Ethernet redundancy you should be able to create an ether<br>channel down from the router if you are going into the same switch or have<br>VSS on the 6500.<br><br>If not I have also bridged it into two separate switches using a BVI like<br>you are looking at.</span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'><br><br>-----Original Message-----<br>From: <a href="mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net</a><br>[mailto:<a href="mailto:cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip-bounces@puck.nether.net</a>] On Behalf Of Ovidiu Popa<br>Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 1:57 PM<br>To: Cisco List VoIP<br>Subject: [cisco-voip] ISR/VG Ethernet redundancy<br><br>Hello everyone<br><br>I have a few questions regarding bridge virtual interfaces and voice<br>protocols:<br>- is binding sccp and/or mgcp to a bvi interface supported by Cisco Tac?<br>- any official configuration guides for this kind of connectivity?<br>- anyone have this configuration in production and would care to share<br>his/hers feedback?<br><br><br>My main goal is to be able to use the spare ethernet interfaces on a<br>router/vg for redundancy but I was surprised by the lack of official<br>guidance on the subject.<br><br>Thanks<br>Ovidiu<br><br><br><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>cisco-voip mailing list<br><a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br><a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>cisco-voip mailing list<br><a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br><a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a></span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Verdana","sans-serif";color:black'><br><br>_______________________________________________<br>cisco-voip mailing list<br><a href="mailto:cisco-voip@puck.nether.net" target="_blank">cisco-voip@puck.nether.net</a><br><a href="https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip" target="_blank">https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip</a></span><span style='color:black'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><pre><span style='color:black'>The contents of this message may contain confidential and/or privileged<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span style='color:black'>subject matter. If this message has been received in error, please contact<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span style='color:black'>the sender and delete all copies. Like other forms of communication,<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span style='color:black'>e-mail communications may be vulnerable to interception by unauthorized<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span style='color:black'>parties. If you do not wish us to communicate with you by e-mail, please<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span style='color:black'>notify us at your earliest convenience. In the absence of such<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span style='color:black'>notification, your consent is assumed. Should you choose to allow us to<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span style='color:black'>communicate by e-mail, we will not take any additional security measures<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span style='color:black'>(such as encryption) unless specifically requested.<o:p></o:p></span></pre><pre><span style='color:black'> <o:p></o:p></span></pre></div></div></div></body></html>