search for: vlanned

Thank you everyone. OK, the mystery deepens, I guess. The machine does need to support several VLAN's, it is currently on a trunkport (8021q encapsulated), it made it into the ARP table - which I specifically tested for by physically unplugging the table, clearing the ARP table and plugging it back in. The ARP table currently looks like this: hq#show arp Protocol Address Age (min)

Hello all, I have a CentOS box that has a NIC (eth0) on which I defined 4 VLAN's (counting the NIC itself): eth0, eth0.1, eth0.2 and eht0.3. Initially the Cisco switch was not partitioned into VLAN's which means that the only VLAN running on it was the default one (VLAN 1). I have then played with VLAN's a bit on the switch and at this point have two: VLAN 1 (which is default and can

OK, thanks again for all your help. I have resolved this, finally. The problem was that I configured VLAN 48 as the native VLAN on the trunk port.That was a mistake as apparently the native VLAN is the one where Cisco does not bother to tag packets. For now I set the native VLAN to VLAN 1 and that works. Cheers, Boris. On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Boris Epstein <borepstein at

Hi, The attached patches enables the bridge to filter and forward packets according to their IEEE 802.1q headers. The goals behind this change include : - Enable running STP on 802.1q tagged networks. STP packets must be untagged. It isn't obvious how else to enable STP with the current bridge and vlan code. - Add native support for an untagged vlan. Currently an untagged vlan can

And additionally here are the detailed port configs on the switch end: hq>show interface Gi1/0/3 switchport Name: Gi1/0/3 Switchport: Enabled Administrative Mode: trunk Operational Mode: trunk Administrative Trunking Encapsulation: dot1q Operational Trunking Encapsulation: dot1q Negotiation of Trunking: On Access Mode VLAN: 48 (VLAN0048) Trunking Native Mode VLAN: 48 (VLAN0048) Administrative

We are using Centos behind an F5 Bigip load balancer. The linux box is using bonding and tagged VLAN's Everything works fine except that when traffic is forwarded from the BigIP to the linux box on the VLAN where the web server is running the linux box returns the traffic on the wrong VLAN, It returns traffic on the lowest ordered VLAN. ie. here is a tcpdump on my load balancer showing

--- In english --- Hello! I am to implement a new architecture of the network in my company but I do not know right where to start ... need help! Currently 90% of my servers are virtual machines under Xen. I have many valid IP networks and all Hypervisors are configured in bridge mode, to simplify. We have 3 VMWare ESX Hypervisor also in bridge mode. Some networks are exclusive to certain

Hi the Crossbow team, I am testing my UV fastpath bits and I found several issues that need your suggestion: 1. dladm show-usage won''t work if UV fastpath is enabled. Since the link usage data are collected based on the statistics of the mac_client_impl_t, and UV fastpath skips the GLDv3 processing, that won''t be available. I don''t see a solution for this except

On 25 January 2015 at 15:12, Boris Epstein <borepstein at gmail.com> wrote: > OK... but why does it need to be a trunk port? > Because a trunk port will "trunk" the vlan. A VLAN is basically a 4 byte "tag" that gets injected into the packet header when the packet enters the VLAN network. When we trunk a VLAN we say to the switch "pass packets on VLAN x but

Hi to the ML. I''m new to VLAN configuration, and combining it to XEN is a bit difficult. I want to use VLAN because it''s possible to "arping" from a domU to an other, and VLAN looks like; the only solution to prevent that. May be I''m wrong if someone got a solution, I may be interrested. I''ve also tryed ebtables, but nothing to prevent arp

This series of patches provides an ability to add VLANs to the bridge ports. This is similar to what can be found in most switches. The bridge port may have any number of VLANs added to it including vlan 0 priority tagged traffic. When vlans are added to the port, only traffic tagged with particular vlan will forwarded over this port. Additionally, vlan ids are added to FDB entries and become

Andrew and Dennis are spot on. Their conclusions about your server being connected to an access port and not a trunk port would be my conclusion as well. On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 9:11 AM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn < dennisml at conversis.de> wrote: > Hi Boris, > what I'd like to know is the actual VLAN configuration of the switch > port (link-type and tagged and untagged VLANs).

Do you need the whole configuration? On the switch end, we have the relevant VLAN (VLAN 48) with the assigned IP address of 192.168.48.101 and the range of ports (Gi1/0/1 - Gi1/0/8) assigned to that VLAN. Seems - and acts - like a legitimate setup and works fine, except for this particular instance. Thanks. Boris. On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 8:54 PM, Dennis Jacobfeuerborn < dennisml at

Hi all, How do you add a VLAN tag to a libvirt SR-IOV VF network usingthe "virsh net-update" command? I couldn't find the section to passto the "virsh net-update" command to add the VLAN tag. I have the following libvirt network defined for a SR-IOV VF: <network>  <name>GE0-0-SRIOV-1</name>  <uuid>7bc67166-c78e-4bcf-89ee-377dd9086631</uuid> 

Hi, I'm using Vlans in my network as a way of preventing pier to pier communication - I only want nodes in the network to talk to the gateway (a linux box). I have successfully set up lots of sub interfaces using the vconfig too, one for each vlan. What I would like to be able to do is remove the ip address from each of these subinterfaces eth0.x and bridge them to eth0. I have successfully

As the issue concerns both the -user (configuration) and -devel (OOPS), I''m sending this message to both lists. Some time ago I complained about two problems: - VLANs are not working on machines with 100 Mbit cards - I get a kernel Oops (sometimes panic) when I try to use bonding and VLANs with Xen The root of the issue is the same in both cases: VLAN interfaces must *not* be

As the issue concerns both the -user (configuration) and -devel (OOPS), I''m sending this message to both lists. Some time ago I complained about two problems: - VLANs are not working on machines with 100 Mbit cards - I get a kernel Oops (sometimes panic) when I try to use bonding and VLANs with Xen The root of the issue is the same in both cases: VLAN interfaces must *not* be

Hello guys, to describe my scenario i have 4 VLANS on my switch, each VLAN is different subject. I have one DHCP server for 3 VLANS + second one DHCP server for 1 VLAN - named VLAN 7 . Problem is , this started to make problems suddenly. VLAN 7 is not recieving IP adress from correct DHCP server . On DHCP server where declaration for subnet is configured, i am recieving this message : Jul 25

Hello. I''m trying to use vlan in domU, but have something strange: I created bridge on eth0. This interface was configured as trunk with vlan 300, 301. I use this bridge in my domU, and I can see tagged packets when run tcpdump in domU. Also I created interface on domU to work with vlan 300. On this interface I see untagged packets in vlan300. And everything looks fine. But when

I've searched around but haven't found a definitive answer yet, is it possible to kickstart from a tagged VLAN? I found this bugzilla: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=431915 But I can't find out how far the vlan support goes. I haven't found anything about it in any kickstart docs. I have two tagged vlans: Vlan 100 - server subnet Vlan 101 - backup subnet From