On 11/26/2010 4:50 PM, Alan Madill wrote:
11/26/2010 2:31 PM, Brad Clarke wrote:
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 1:35 PM, Alan Madill<[email protected]> wrote:
should not have both tagged and untagged traffic on the same port
That depends on the switch. Some switches will not let you tag with
VLAN 1, so the only way to get there is with untagged traffic. They
also sometimes won't let you access the management interface on any
VLAN other than 1. This is what I have to do for our Dell switches and
I have no problems with martians (using Debian):
To make it more complicated I think he is trying to make use of voice VLANs
which seem to be a sort of hybrid.
http://cciepursuit.wordpress.com/2009/01/01/group-study-good-explanation-of-the-voice-vlan/
From the link above...
The official Cisco stance is that this is not a trunk
<http://www.groupstudy.com/archives/ccielab/200812/msg00219.html>:
Cisco calls this a Multi-Vlan access port, and NOT a trunk port. if it were a
trunk port, according to Cisco, it would flood all vlans configured on the
switch out to the phone. As you probably know already, a port configured for
voice Vlan does not flood out all Vlans to the phone, just the voice vlan frames
(tagged) and the data frames ( untagged ).
The data frames are not tagged and would show up on the default VLAN?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Increase Visibility of Your 3D Game App & Earn a Chance To Win $500!
Tap into the largest installed PC base & get more eyes on your game by
optimizing for Intel(R) Graphics Technology. Get started today with the
Intel(R) Software Partner Program. Five $500 cash prizes are up for grabs.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/intelisp-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Shorewall-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users
