On (2008-12-01 12:02 +0000), David Freedman wrote: > SIP/SPA does indeed provide per-port local VLAN significance for this > platform, please prepare your wallet in such case :)
Not 100% sure where this reply was directed, but SIP/SPA has exactly same caveats as ES+, you're still limited to 4k VLANs per chassis, as each L3 interface sucks 1 VLAN, ES+ nor SIP/SPA changes this. And the actual number of interface is even lower than 4k, if you use VRFs, as each VRF suck one VLAN too, if you are not utilizing VPN-CAM. > >> Just to add (if i remember right) that ES and SRB didn't support local > >> VLAN significance under single tagged subifs. > >> I haven't checked if SRD and/or ES+ solve this problem. > > > > ES+ does solve the issue indeed, but you're still limited to 4k VLANs. In > > ES cards > > you need you use EVC to terminate colliding VLANs. > > Cisco, please allow defining IP address directly under EVC, without > > requiring > > bridge-group. For setups where you always only terminate through > > one interface, switching is not needed and the additional configuration > > is undesired. > >> Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote on 28/11/2008 18:01: > >>> You're looking for "local VLAN significance". > >>> > >>> You probably have to get one of the WAN-style (ES20/40 for sure, don't > >>> know for SIP/SPA) cards. -- ++ytti _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
