Grant, The concepts here are simple:
Layer 2: VLan only, no layer 3 interface. Layer 3: Vlan and SVI created Now, if you have a layer 2 vlan and no corresponding layer 3 SVI, your traffic won't be routed because there is no layer 3 interface to handle the routing. If your trunks are set up and the layer 3 is being serviced from the 6500, then that's the only place layer 3 should happen. The easiest thing for you to do here, is post your configurations. -- Regards, Jason Plank CCIE #16560 e: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: "Grant Moerschel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > The only SVI configured on the 3560 is the VLAN1 interface. Is this > incorrect? My assumption was that the V1 SVI, a default route for V1, > and "no ip routing" was all that was needed but when I did that I > couldn't talk with the other VLANs on the switch. I may have overlooked > something. > > Given my description of the 3560 (routing on, one SVI for VLAN1, one > trunk to the core), do you think that the local V8 traffic on the 3560 > is being routed via VLAN1 in contrast to being tagged and forwarded as > VLAN8 via the trunk to the core? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Mike Louis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 12:11 PM > To: Grant Moerschel; [email protected] > Subject: RE: [c-nsp] L3 vs. L2 trunk connections to a 6509 core. > Easyrouter-head question. > > If you are going to use the 3560 as a L2 switch you can disable ip > routing. You will need to define a management interface and > default-gateway for the management vlan on the switch only. All VLANs > including management will be L2 only. Do not configure VLAN SVI if you > only want to use the 3560 as a layer 3 switch. Did you configure EIGRP > on the 3560 as well? If so that may be why you are getting routing > information via VLAN 3 to the 6509. > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Grant Moerschel > Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:45 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [c-nsp] L3 vs. L2 trunk connections to a 6509 core. Easy > router-head question. > > I am trying to determine what is normal here. This is the situation. I > have a 6509 Sup1a/MSFC2 running the latest CatOS/IOS for that hardware. > I run EIGRP. I have several VLANs on the core and use VTP. When I trunk > a 2950 L2 switch to the core I specify VTP on the 2950. No problem. All > VLANs show up on the 2950. For our eighth floor, for example, I trunk > V1, V8, and V100 and clear all other VLANs from the trunk. V100 is for > Voice and V8 is for most PCs for Data. My assumption is that if an > access port is "switchport access vlan 8" and the PC is plugged in to > that port, he's on V8. To get off that broadcast network to some other > destination, he hits the gateway which is the L3 interface on the core > 6509 MSFC2. I get all this. > > Here's the question. If my access switch is a 3560 which is a Layer 3 > switch, it seems that I have to have it participate in EIGRP to make it > work. But this does not make sense because for this application I still > have a single trunk to the core from the 3560. If I trunk V1, V10, and > V100 from the 3560 to the 6509, doesn't communication just go down the > trunk to the 6509 L3 gateway? For example, if my PC is on a 3560 V10 > port and needs to hit something on V8, shouldn't the 3560 forward the > frame down the trunk to the 6509 which'll route onto V8, up V8's trunk > to that access switch and forward it out to the destination? If I look > at my routes on the 3560, they all say "to get to V10 you must go > through the 6509 V1 layer 3 interface" (I hope that makes sense). > > Should I turn off "ip routing" on the 3560 in order to mimic the setup > of the 2950 <----> 6509 trunk link? What am I missing? > > Thanks > > ~~~~ > Grant P. Moerschel > WaveGard, Inc. > gm -at- wavegard -dot- com > ~~~~ > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ > > > Note: This message and any attachments is intended solely for the use of > the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain > information that is non-public, proprietary, legally privileged, > confidential, and/or exempt from disclosure. If you are not the > intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, > distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. > If you have received this communication in error, please notify the > original sender immediately by telephone or return email and destroy or > delete this message along with any attachments immediately. > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
