Could you perhaps use a bridge group? We can bridge traffic from a physical interface to a wireless controller module. Perhaps you could have a sub interface on each of the physical interfaces for the VLAN using the bridge group. How about something like this:
interface FastEthernet0/0 no ip address duplex auto speed auto ! interface FastEthernet0/0.5 description Wireless RF-Video encapsulation dot1Q 5 bridge-group 5 ! interface FastEthernet0/1.5 encapsulation dot1Q 5 bridge-group 5 ! interface BVI5 description Optional IP for troubleshooting / management ip address 172.16.240.43 255.255.255.0 ! bridge 5 protocol ieee bridge 5 route ip Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2011 18:13:02 +0100 > From: Pavel Dimow <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: [c-nsp] How to pass VLAN through router > Message-ID: > <[email protected]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > Is this possible at all? I ended in pretty ugly scenario (for a short > time period I hope) where I must pass VLAN through router (yes router > not L3 switch). The scenario is: > > SW1-----trunk-----R1-----trunk-----R2-----trunk-----L3SWITCH > > I don't have control over SW1 and R1, but I do know that I have trunk > from my R2 to other side R1 for sure (I already terminate one VLAN on > R2). Now, I need somehow to get VLAN from other side (SW1) to L3SWITCH > where I will setup a SVI. > > Any thoughts? How router behaves considering VLANs? Is it only > possible to terminate vlan on subinterface and no vlan passing? It is > logical to me, because router is a router not a switch (in my case R2 > is Cisco ASR). And IF router will pass VLAN over trunk interfaces how > do I control which VLANs are allowed to pass over which interface? > > > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
