As a best practice for security, avoid using vlan1 since this is
usually used for management and in the past has had vlan hopping
vulnerabilities. Overall, using multiple vlans on a single physical
link is a very effective, economical and secure way to manage a network.
Park
On May 16, 2006, at 1:39 PM, Ispánovits Imre wrote:
* PGP Signed by an unknown key: 05/16/06 at 13:39:47
On Tue, 16 May 2006 19:15:08 +0200
Angelo Turetta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ispánovits Imre wrote:
If in this switch I dont't find any possibility to define that
tagged port
ten it means that this switch is unable to do this kind of job,
or maybe if I
define a port which belongs to all the defined vlans, as a common
one, I can
use it to connect the nic to?
If the switch supports VLANs, it must support tagged ports. The
actual
terms used might differ: generally, if the interface lets you
assign one
port to multiple VLANs, then it's implicit they are tagged. One
port can
be assigned as 'untagged' to one and only one VLAN.
That's it! I can define port to belong to multiple vlans, so I can
it try
tomorrow.
It is an other thing that not knowing the vlans, I am a little bit
uncertain
if it is secure enough on a firewall. I mean packets are sharing
the same
physical media. How secure is it?
Thank you
Imre
* Unknown Key
* 0x077AD082
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
