Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

On 2016-09-19 22:48, Peter Rathlev wrote: Just to be crystal clear: Sup2T hardware and software fully supports using same VLAN ID on different interfaces, and you can mix it with a SVI for good measure. Nick Cutting posted a configuration snippet that shows what can be done. Ok missed that,

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

On Mon, 2016-09-19 at 11:39 +0200, Anders Löwinger wrote: > Sup2t has support in HW for using same VLAN-id on different L3  > interfaces. Cisco has no SW to support it :( Just to be crystal clear: Sup2T hardware and software fully supports using same VLAN ID on different interfaces, and you can

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

It's a switch! -pavel On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 11:39 AM, Anders Löwinger wrote: > On 2016-09-19 10:19, Gert Doering wrote: > >> Things like that makes one wonder if Sup2T is intentionally trying to >> kill the platform... "too late, too limited, too stupid design decisions" >>

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

On 2016-09-19 10:19, Gert Doering wrote: Things like that makes one wonder if Sup2T is intentionally trying to kill the platform... "too late, too limited, too stupid design decisions" (like, the new netflow implementation "with MAC addresses"). Sup2t has support in HW for using same VLAN-id

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

Hi, On Mon, Sep 19, 2016 at 09:52:33AM +0200, Peter Rathlev wrote: > I haven't played with it, but the implementation on Sup2T seems quite > limited. As a start you need to globally enable provider-bridge dot1ad > mode, which is incompatible with using LACP. Things like that makes one wonder if

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

Good morning, > Am 19.09.2016 um 09:52 schrieb Peter Rathlev : > > On Sat, 2016-09-17 at 14:24 +0200, Łukasz Bromirski wrote: >>> On 16 Sep 2016, at 17:32, Nick Cutting wrote: >>> Depends on supervisor - With sup 2t - you could reuse vlans on >>> subinterfaces, here is 2

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

On Sat, 2016-09-17 at 14:24 +0200, Łukasz Bromirski wrote: > > On 16 Sep 2016, at 17:32, Nick Cutting wrote: > > Depends on supervisor - With sup 2t - you could reuse vlans on > > subinterfaces, here is 2 subinterfaces on different ports, and an > > SVI all on vlan 281 > > > > ! > > interface

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

> On 16 Sep 2016, at 17:32, Nick Cutting > wrote: > > Depends on supervisor - With sup 2t - you could reuse vlans on subinterfaces, > here is 2 subinterfaces on different ports, and an SVI all on vlan 281 > > ! > interface Vlan281 > no ip

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

Network Service Providers <cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net> Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if? Depends on supervisor - With sup 2t - you could reuse vlans on subinterfaces, here is 2 subinterfaces on different ports, and an SVI all on vlan 281 ! interface

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

at6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if? On 16/09/2016 13:36, Curtis Piehler wrote: > Exactly! On the 6500/7600 platforms you can't have your cake and eat > it > :) Indeed :-). And 'routed ports' are actally SVIs on a VLAN you don't see, but does get taken from the g

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

On 16/09/16 12:06, Gert Doering wrote: use a different tag :-) - and yes, this is one of the big drawbacks of the 6500 architecture (or, depending how you use it, one of the strong sides) - it's a switch, with routing. So vlan space is "switchy". It's not clear to me if they fixed this in

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

On 16/09/2016 13:36, Curtis Piehler wrote: Exactly! On the 6500/7600 platforms you can't have your cake and eat it :) Indeed :-). And 'routed ports' are actally SVIs on a VLAN you don't see, but does get taken from the global pool (try 'show vlan internal usage' sometime). A 6500 is a

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

Exactly! On the 6500/7600 platforms you can't have your cake and eat it :) On Sep 16, 2016 7:32 AM, "Gert Doering" wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 01:13:54PM +0200, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > > I expected the SP and the RP to be orthogonal to each other ... > >

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

Hi, On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 01:13:54PM +0200, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > I expected the SP and the RP to be orthogonal to each other ... Well, they are - but the RP needs the SP to get the packet out :-) (On the WAN interface cards, you actually have "real routed" interfaces, but these have

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

Hi! > Am 16.09.2016 um 13:08 schrieb Curtis Piehler : > > If the card is switching type card then yes it does care and draws from the > internal VLAN database. The true routed cards (SPA) are not part of the > internal VLAN database. I ran into this on 7600 routers

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

If the card is switching type card then yes it does care and draws from the internal VLAN database. The true routed cards (SPA) are not part of the internal VLAN database. I ran into this on 7600 routers with WS line cards. However the SPA cards in the chassis did not draw from the internal

Re: [c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

Hi, On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:56:46PM +0200, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > Core1(config-subif)#int gi4/9.100 > Core1(config-subif)#encapsulation dot1Q 100 > Command rejected: VLAN 100 cannot be allocated. VLANs 1-1005 are VTP VLANs > VTP mode is client or server and must be changed to

[c-nsp] Cat6500 VLAN cannot be assigned to a routed port sub-if?

Hi, all, I just stumbled into a minor POLA violation here: (at least I'm astonished ;-) Core1(config-subif)#int gi4/9.100 Core1(config-subif)#encapsulation dot1Q 100 Command rejected: VLAN 100 cannot be allocated. VLANs 1-1005 are VTP VLANs VTP mode is client or server and must be changed to