Intra-switch VLANs Netgear
Bookmark this page:
 Yahoo!
 Google
 Windows Live
 del.icio.us
 digg
 Netscape
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by amattina@layer8group.com on September 6, 2006, 1:46 pm
Please log in for more thread options I've been going over and testing this vlan problem for a long time now and still can't get too far. I've read up a significant amount on how this should work and I'm mainly getting confused between Netgear and Cisco's interpretations of what each feature does. Here is a diagram of what I think I should have. Ideally, I have a GSM7324 switch with a whole class C cut up among it. This core switch feeds into (right now just one) layer 2 switch which has corresponding vlans. These switches talk to each other and out the gateway. The vlans right now can talk to each other via routing on the switch which is okay. I can do those ACLs after this step is completed. Here is an image of the basic structure: http://157.238.136.5/cage-fixup.jpg The main problem is that I cannot get the two switches uplinked to each other. I need machines on vlan 17 to be able to talk to the layer 3 switch and therefore every other subnet on the layer 3 switch. If I uplink them as diagramed things start to act like a broadcast storm on the layer 3 switch. This shouldn't be the case because the ports that are uplinked are different and on different vlans. Netgear told me that there wasn't a feature like 'Cisco Trunking' on the switches so thats why the multiple uplinks. If there is a way to do it with one uplink cable that is obviously the preferred method. Everything on the layer 2 switch in vlan #3 can get to the layer 3 switch and the Internet. If I plug my laptop directly into vlan #17 on the layer3 switch that works as well. Let me know any ideas or thoughts on how I could have this wrong and make it right. Thanks, Adam | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Walter Roberson on September 6, 2006, 2:36 pm
Please log in for more thread options >The main problem is that I cannot get the two switches uplinked to each
>other. I need machines on vlan 17 to be able to talk to the layer 3 >switch and therefore every other subnet on the layer 3 switch. If I >uplink them as diagramed things start to act like a broadcast storm on >the layer 3 switch. This shouldn't be the case because the ports that >are uplinked are different and on different vlans. Netgear told me that >there wasn't a feature like 'Cisco Trunking' on the switches so thats >why the multiple uplinks. It is documented as supporting trunks. ftp://downloads.netgear.com/files/gsm7312_gsm7324_fsm7326p_adminguide.pdf Chapter 3, examples #2 and #3 Also, the introduction in Chapter 3 says specifically, "A given port may handle traffic for more than one VLAN, but it can only support one default VLAN ID." If you cannot get the GSM7324 to handle multiple VLANs on the same port using the procedures documented there, then get a refund on the switch. (Oh wait, this is Netgear, it is corporate policy that you *can't* get a refund on the switch; the most you can do is exchange in endless succession hoping that -eventually- you will get one that they have fixed the feature on.) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by amattina@layer8group.com on September 6, 2006, 2:55 pm
Please log in for more thread options
Thanks for your response. Trust me, I know the frustration of working with half-ass quality equipment and poor documentation. This document you linked to didn't exist when this problem started. Its just time to get back around to solving this one now. I'll check it out. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by amattina@layer8group.com on September 6, 2006, 3:12 pm
Please log in for more thread options
That document is endlessly confusing... The pictures don't match the commands...the interfaces are totally different and they don't mention what the configuration should be like on the other end of the switch. What about the layer 2 switch configuration? Its a near miracle that I got the IP configuration on this switch correct and that its actually routing inbetween the subnet interfaces. Isn't the point of having a layer 3 switch and vlans to be able to route between the vlans? That is what I'm trying to do here, not have certain ports accessable by multiple vlans. I should be able to do that at layer 3, not 2. Each vlan should contain the broadcast domain at layer 2, all requests to outside subnets should go to the virutal router interface and then routed to another vlan on the switch after passing the ACLs into that other subnet. Is my thinking totally out of whack or does this product not seem to do that? amattina@layer8group.com wrote: > Thanks for your response. Trust me, I know the frustration of working
> with half-ass quality equipment and poor documentation. This document > you linked to didn't exist when this problem started. Its just time to > get back around to solving this one now. I'll check it out. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted by Walter Roberson on September 6, 2006, 5:03 pm
Please log in for more thread options
[netgear GSM7324] >That document is endlessly confusing...
>Isn't the point of having a layer 3 switch and vlans to be able to
>route between the vlans? That is what I'm trying to do here, not have >certain ports accessable by multiple vlans. You were using multiple ports to communicate between the devices because Netgear told you there was no trunking facility... but there is. So you only need one cable between the two devices, and you want the ports set up to carry all the VLANs needed to trunk between the two. >I should be able to do that
>at layer 3, not 2. Each vlan should contain the broadcast domain at >layer 2, all requests to outside subnets should go to the virutal >router interface and then routed to another vlan on the switch after >passing the ACLs into that other subnet. Is my thinking totally out of >whack or does this product not seem to do that? Look in Chapter 5 "IP Routing Services" of the manual, and in particular at the section "VLAN Routing". I draw particular attention to the command section of Example 2, which enables routing on the vlans, ending in "show ip vlan". The explanatory main text after that says, This returns the logical interface IDs that will be used instead of slot/port in subsequent routing commands. Assume that VLAN 10 is assigned ID 3/1 and VLAN 20 is assigned ID 3/2. What this is hiding is the fact that when you configure routing on a VLAN interface, there is no predetermined interface name that will be used to refer to the VLAN. For example, if you enable routing on VLAN 179, then there is NO interface created named anything like "vlan179" or "3/179", or any other fixed predictable interface name. Instead, what you get is the next available interface number in the 3 series on card 1, which is to say the next available number in the series starting 1/3/ . So the first VLAN created is 1/3/1, the second is 1/3/2, and so on, no matter what the VLAN tag numbers are. And those are the names you have to use to configure IP addresses and so on against. Yes, this -does- mean that you cannot automate VLAN additions without using an "expect" script [or equivilent] smart enough to "show ip vlan" and pick out the interface numbers already in use and carefully fill in the holes. You have to pay close attention to "show ip vlan" because that's the only way to determine the interface number you have to configure the layer 3 information against. If you want some real fun, try measuring the performance of vlan routing. Or better yet, run some multicasting... | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Similar Threads | Posted |
| Intra-switch VLANs Netgear | September 6, 2006, 1:46 pm |
| Netgear FS526T | January 25, 2005, 8:48 pm |
| NetGear WGU624 | March 16, 2006, 6:37 pm |
| Netgear WGT624 V2 Router | July 7, 2004, 2:28 pm |
| Voyager 205 and Netgear FS605 | May 6, 2005, 6:00 pm |
| Dead Netgear PE-102s | March 29, 2006, 6:09 pm |
| Netgear and Cisco Trunk | May 3, 2007, 4:04 am |
| Re: Netgear powerline extenders | May 12, 2008, 4:25 pm |
| Netgear GSM72224 VLAN config | November 8, 2004, 12:49 pm |
| Netgear router setup problem | January 7, 2006, 6:56 pm |
| Netgear router setup problem | January 7, 2006, 6:56 pm |
| Allied Telesyn vs Cisco vs netgear | March 24, 2006, 4:02 pm |
| Third Party SFPs in Netgear Switches | September 24, 2006, 2:27 pm |
| Bizarre interaction between macbook pro and Netgear WGT624v2 | January 10, 2007, 5:52 pm |
| wireless connection only stay up for 2 min./NetGEAR WGT624 | February 21, 2005, 8:04 pm |
>whole class C cut up among it.