The below are my 3524xl uplinks to my other switches, I dont have to put switch access commands in...I assume you are running default isl/dot1q encapsulation for the trunking...I dont see any commands for the ISL or Dot1Q trunks listed.
interface GigabitEthernet0/1 description to sjc5-00-gw1 switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q switchport trunk allowed vlan 1,152,155,1002-1005 switchport mode trunk ! interface GigabitEthernet0/2 description to sjc5-00-gw2 switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q switchport trunk allowed vlan 1,152,155,1002-1005 switchport mode trunk Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rutger Blom" To: Sent: Monday, February 24, 2003 1:22 PM Subject: Trunk question [7:63653] > Today I've been busy configuring a trunk on some Cisco 2950c/2924c switches. > Could somebody explain the difference between these two configurations: > > Config 1: > interface FastEthernet0/25 > switchport mode trunk > no ip address > > Config 2: > interface FastEthernet0/25 > switchport access vlan 204 > switchport mode trunk > no ip address > > With the first configuration, clients on the VLAN 204 did not get an IP > address from the DHCP server. Even clients with a static IP-address could > not establish IP contact with other hosts. The switch however could see > other switches via the "show cdp" commando. It could also "ping" other > switches. (all switches are in a separate management VLAN). > When I made the change resulting in configuration two everything worked > fine. > Note that the trunk is a FX link to a Cisco 2924c switch. This switch has > two FX ports. Both ports are configured to be trunk ports. I configured one > of those FX ports with the "switchport access vlan 204" aswell. The other FX > trunk port has a configuration as shown in config 1. This trunk port has a > FX link to a third Cisco 2924c switch. This switch operates in VLAN 107. > Everything works fine in this switch. I did not have to specify the > "switchport access vlan 107" on either of these ports. > > Is there some incompatibility issue between 2950c and 2924c? Why didn't it > work with config 1 on the Cisco 2950c switch? Can a Cisco 2924c switch have > its two FX ports configured as a trunk like in config 1? Even when those two > FX ports have physical links to different switches? > > A lot of questions, but I'm just very curious. > To make this a bit more clear I've attached a .txt file with a simple > drawing and configurations of the current situation. > > Thanks in advance, > > Rutger > Sweden > > > > > [demime removed a uuencoded section named site.txt which was 30 lines] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=63672&t=63653 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
