The switchport needs to be in trunk mode, and put your management vlan 
as the native vlan:
switchport trunk native vlan 703

Then use eth0 to set the management ip address.

On 12-01-13 9:11 AM, Bill Arlofski wrote:
> On 01/13/12 08:21, Morris, Andi wrote:
>> Thanks Francois, those were ideas I hadn't even considered.
>>
>> Running a show vlan on the switch and I can see that vlan 704 is indeed 
>> created, and the dot1x port is in it.
>>
>> However, I have since plugged the laptop into a port that is statically 
>> configured to be in vlan 704 and I'm still not getting an IP address from 
>> packetfence, suggesting, as you say, that the vlans are not being trunked 
>> across to the pf server correctly.
>>
>> I've checked further and there's something funky going on somewhere, but I'm 
>> struggling to work out whether it's a problem with the network, or the 
>> packetfence network config.
>>
>> The three vlans that packetfence has legs in are:
>> Management - 10.1.3.0/24 (vlan ID 703) - pf address 10.1.3.10 gateway 
>> 10.1.3.2 (address of the network router) - interface eth0
>> Registration - 10.1.4.0/24 (vlan ID 704) - pf address 10.1.4.10 gateway 
>> 10.1.4.10 (pf address for that  vlan) - interface eth0.704
>> Isolation - 10.1.5.0/24 (vlan ID 705) - pf address 10.1.5.10 gateway 
>> 10.1.5.10 (pf address for that vlan) - interface eth0.705
>>
>> These are all connected via a single interface, with the virtual interfaces 
>> as written above.
>>
>> The interface is plugged into the cisco core directly.
>>
>> Now...if I configure the port on the core to be a network trunk using 
>> 'switchport mode trunk' I can ping both the isolation and registration 
>> network cards from the core, but not the management network card.  If I 
>> configure the port to be an access port using 'switchport mode access' and 
>> 'switchport access vlan 703' I can ping the management vlan, but not the 
>> other two!
>>
>> I've taken this to our network team, and they're baffled, and can't see 
>> anything wrong with the setup on the core, suggesting that it's an issue 
>> with the packetfence network setup, but I'm struggling.
>>
>> Any ideas?
> Hi Andi... From what you just described, I would double-check your network
> settings on the pf box.
>
> It is acting like you have assigned 10.1.3.10/24 to "eth0", instead of a VLAN
> interface such as "eth0.703" - or "vlan703" - depending on how you have
> configured your VLAN interfaces to be named.
>
> You have two options here:
>
> Option 1. Leave switch port in trunk mode, and make sure that you have
> assigned eth0 NO IP address but make sure the interface is up. And make sure
> that vlan703 is assigned 10.1.3.10/24
>
> Option 2. Set the switch port to "general" mode, with VLAN 703 untagged and a
> PVID of 703, and with VLANS 704 and 705 tagged.
>
>
> Either method should clear this up for you.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> --
> Bill Arlofski
> Reverse Polarity, LLC
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> RSA(R) Conference 2012
> Mar 27 - Feb 2
> Save $400 by Jan. 27
> Register now!
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2
> _______________________________________________
> Packetfence-users mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users
>


-- 
Francois Gaudreault, ing. jr
[email protected]  ::  +1.514.447.4918 (x130) ::  www.inverse.ca
Inverse inc. :: Leaders behind SOGo (www.sogo.nu) and PacketFence 
(www.packetfence.org)


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RSA(R) Conference 2012
Mar 27 - Feb 2
Save $400 by Jan. 27
Register now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/rsa-sfdev2dev2
_______________________________________________
Packetfence-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/packetfence-users

Reply via email to