netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???

To: buytenh@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: 802.1q Was (Re: Plans for 2.5 / 2.6 ???
From: Rob Walker <rob@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 2 Jun 2000 09:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, gleb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0006021439170.19298-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <Pine.GSO.4.20.0006020741140.13652-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <Pine.LNX.4.21.0006021439170.19298-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: rob@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> On Fri, 2 Jun 2000 15:19:15 +0200 (MEST), Lennert Buytenhek
>>>>> <buytenh@xxxxxxx> said:

>> Fair enough that you want to route them. But you can certainly
>> still do this with policy routing for example. The only place i see
>> routing taking effect is in the boundary between VLANs and non-VLAN
>> domains.

and between VLAN-IS and VLAN-ENG, and between VLAN-ACCT and
VLAN-INTERNET, and between VLAN-* and VLAN-GAMES.

Lennert> Well, routing is maybe not the best example. But the fact is
Lennert> that VLANs look and feel a lot like separate
Lennert> interfaces. That's probably why both 802.1q patches treat
Lennert> them as such.

>> Out of ignorance: Is there anyone (vendor) who does routing of
>> VLANs?

Lennert> I think it would make perfect sense. Connect a bunch of
Lennert> machines from different VLANs to a VLAN switch, and connect
Lennert> the switch to a VLANning router via a trunk line.

routing of packets between VLANs?  Of course.

Router#sh ver


Cisco Internetwork Operating System Software 
IOS (tm) 7200 Software (C7200-JS56I-M), Version 12.0(7)T,  RELEASE SOFTWARE 
(fc2)

Router#sh run

<snip>

interface FastEthernet2/0
 no ip address
 no ip directed-broadcast
 no ip mroute-cache
 full-duplex
!
interface FastEthernet2/0.1
 description desc1
 encapsulation dot1Q 1
 ip address a.b.c.d 255.255.255.192 secondary
 ip address e.f.g.h 255.255.255.128
 no ip directed-broadcast
 no ip mroute-cache
!         
interface FastEthernet2/0.2
 description desc2
 encapsulation dot1Q 4095
 ip address e.f.g.i 255.255.255.240 secondary
 ip address a.b.j.k 255.255.255.128 secondary
 ip address l.m.o.p 255.255.255.240
 no ip directed-broadcast
 no ip mroute-cache




>> Again from the above, you really dont need a device. Really, take a
>> look at James Leu's MPLS which is a similar (introduces the extra
>> shim headers etc) but a more complex issue. He doesnt introduce any
>> new devices.

Lennert> I don't really see yet how we can do clean support without
Lennert> fake devices.  Will his 'solution' let us attach IP addresses
Lennert> to VLAN interfaces for example?

Lennert> Do you have a URL?

Why should VLANs not be fake devices?  How are they different from
aliased interfaces?

rob


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>