similar to: pxe boot with trunk ports

I am using 8021q vlans on my servers, and I cannot figure out how to make PXE/DHCP work. Has anyone figured out how to do this ?

<I apologize if this arrives twice... I sent it first from an non-subscribed address, don't know if that'll get to the list or not --JJ> Hi folks, I have an implementation question regarding bridging on a linux box between a catalyst trunk port and a cisco 26something w/802.1q subinterfaces. So right now, there's no vlan trunking going on on the link my bridging firewall sits

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

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).

I''m trying to implement simple untagged vlans on our switch and have misconfigured something.. ISP gw is on the default vlan1 (untagged) Router eth1 is setup on the switch with default vlan1 and member of vlan4. eth0 is default vlan4 which connects to the clients that are all default members of vlan4 eth0 is x.x.x.86/28 This is what clients are connecting to as their gw.. (no

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

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

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, I use a script network-multi vlan and network-bridge-vlan for multiple VLANs in domu. Several domu uses the bridge vlanbr30. Need to dom0 as was in this vlan''e. How? I tried to put a bridge interface ip, but with him until the rest domu in vlanbr30 not get through. How to understand the need to create a virtual interface (vifx.y) and add it to the bridge vlanbr30. How?

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

Any recommendations on an economical layer 3 switch? Preferably something that you have hands on experience with connecting to IP phones with attached PCs? Specifically I need the ability to set the VLAN in the phone to tag voice packets and to set a native VLAN on a per port basis on the switch to put the untagged packets from the attached PC into a separate VLAN. POE is not a requirement

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

I'm looking for some information regarding the interaction of KVM, VLANs, firewalld, and the kernel's forwarding configuration. I would appreciate input especially from anyone already running a similar configuration in production. In short, I'm trying to figure out if a current configuration is inadvertently opening up traffic across network segments. On earlier versions of CentOS

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 You must add first: vlan (tagged) to eth2 eth2 interface is not tagged by default and not know vlan-s . It is like a cisco if you have 24 ports in cisco by default all ports are in vlan1. if you want to do trunk (with vlans) you myst add (vlans) to this ports (tagged or untagged) So you can compare that all interfaces in linux by default are in one vlan(but not tagged). (only for

Changes since v9: * series re-ordering so make functionality more distinct. Basic vlan filtering is patches 1-4. Support for PVID/untagged vlans is patches 5 and 6. VLAN support for FDB/MDB is patches 7-11. Patch 12 is still additional egress policy. * Slight simplification to code that extracts the VID from skb. Since we now depend on the vlan module, at the time of input skb_tci is

I''m playing around with VLAN''s and I have a VLAN capable (layer 2) smart switch. I see a steady stream of martians in the logfile if I have the routefilter option set on the loc zone interfaces in /etc/shorewall/interfaces. I have two interfaces in the loc zone, eth1 and vlan2 respectively. vlan2 is an 802.1q trunk going towards the switch. Is this the expected behavior in

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

Hello to everybody, Sorry if my english isn?t very good. I need pass 802.1q through a VPN between two offices. I have mounted a WRT54GL, with OpenWRT firmware, conected to a switch trunk port in both offices. In the switch of the first office I have created five tagged VLANs and I need pass these VLAN to the second offices where it has created it too. Can I do this with Tinc in HUB/Switch