similar to: [Bridge] Vlan tagging through a bridge to a VM

Hi all, Is it possible to have native VLAN (802.1q) and a VLAN x at the same time in DOMU''s? This is what I have configured on my DOM0 (xen2): Eth0 (connected by a 801.1q trunk to Cisco 2950 switch) Created vlan100 : vconfig eth0 100 Created bridge : brctl addbr br100 Attach switchport: brctl addif br100 eth0.100 Attach a DOMU : brctl addif br100 vif2.0 I now have bridge br100

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

<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

Hello, My name is Ferm?n Gal?n and I work as Research Engineer at CTTC, Spain. I'm trying to configure a bridge with brctl to switch VLAN tagged traffic (802.1q), but I'm getting some problems. In particular, I've a physical interface (eth2) connected to a Cisco trunk port (so, the traffic to/from eth2 is tagged). I've added eth2 to a bridge ('brctl addif somebrige

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 All, I posted this question several days before, as if no one reply, any help, hint would be highly appreciated! PLEASE SAVE ME! Now I am having trouble in Ethernet bridge and 802.1Q VLAN, I have the following network: Internet | | Gateway | | <--------- If insert one Ethernet bridge box in here ,somethings changes | H u b ( one normal

OK... but why does it need to be a trunk port? Boris. On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 6:53 PM, SilverTip257 <silvertip257 at gmail.com> wrote: > 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

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).

Hi Boris, what I'd like to know is the actual VLAN configuration of the switch port (link-type and tagged and untagged VLANs). When I look at the switchport coniguration here I get (among other things): ... Port link-type: trunk Tagged VLAN ID : 8, 1624 Untagged VLAN ID : 10 ... Here is my suspicion: Your ports have an access link-type with an untagged VLAN ID of 48. That would

we would like setup VLAN on CENTOS 5.X and 4.x. Only VLAN will active, but primary LAN NOT active. E.g "eth0" inactive, but "eth0.2" active. I have been tried several ways, but never successful. Any ideal? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ ?????????Yahoo!??????2.0?????????????

On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Andrew Holway <andrew.holway at gmail.com> wrote: > 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

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

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)

On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Boris Epstein <borepstein at gmail.com> wrote: > Hello all, > > I have a machine running Centos 6.6 connected to a port on a Cisco Catalyst > 3750 series switch. That port is part of VLAN 48. I have VLAN 48 on the > CentOS machine too. > > The IP network on VLAN 48 is 192.168.48.0/255.255.255.0. The address on the > CentOS side is

Hi all, I created a two node cluster that manages virtual machines with two servers connected via a cross cable on the network 10.0.0.0/24. I want that machines that runs on different servers in the network 172.16.0.0/24 can see all the others. To make this possible I've configured a vlan on each server: ... ... 5: eth1.111 at eth1: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc

Hi all, I''m having a hell of a time getting my IFB to work. I know I''ve done this before, so I''m missing something stupid. Can anybody tell me what it might be? Configs as follows: -------- #!/bin/sh modprobe ifb numifbs=1000 modprobe act_mirred modprobe 8021q brctl addbr br0 brctl setfd br0 0 brctl stp br0 off brctl addif br0 eth1 brctl addif br0 eth2 ifconfig eth1

Less, You are 100% right. Of course I brought up my eth0 - but, like you said, with no IP. Meanwhile, I brought up eth0.48 with 192.168.48.100. However, until I would bring up eth0 with an IP address (any in the network) I would have no connection. Why? That's what I fail to understand. Boris. On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 6:45 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote: > On

Hi, I have created a libvirt network on top of a OVS bridge (named vlan-br) which receives all VLAN tagged packets, i.e. connected to a trunk port. The definition xml is below. What I want to achieve in the portgroup definition 'trunk-native-1221' is to allow 1221 as untagged/native but rest all VLAN as tagged. The following portgroup definition works, but I don't want to enumerate

Just curious, if I have my Polycom IP 550 phone VLAN tag 30, will the packets I send from my PC(on the PC port of the phone) have the same VLAN tag? THe PC is sending untagged packets. This e-mail, facsimile, or letter and any files or attachments transmitted with it contains information that is confidential and privileged. This information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) and