I have a question if I Stack a Catalyst 3750 L3 with a Catalyst just L2, will we able to use all L3 capabilities?
Switches are
WS-C3750G-24TS-E1U
WS-C3750V2-24PS-S
As we know there are three layer in cisco Network Model:
-Core
-Distribution
-Access
So my question is in Core / Distribution layer should i use Etherchannel between switches or use Stacking if switches are stackble.For ex: suppose I have two cisco 3750 switches . so should i use etherchannel between them or use stacking in core layer?What are the advantages and disadv of both.
I want to setup VLAN with the switches SG300 and SLM2024. What is the suggestion to connect these 2 switches. We have the Juniper net screen.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have at the core a CISCO 4503 and need to connect various 3COM 3300/4400/4900 access switches thru fiber. The problem is that the Cisco core 4503 switch fails to recognize only the 4900 3com switches ie the link status shows down. The fiber multitude link is tested and OK.The modules on both the switches ie 1000baseSX are also tested and ok.
The Cisco switch has a 6port gb ic with 1000baseSX moules and the 3COM 4900 has a 4-port 1000baseSX module.
My first question is I have an access layer switch which is a single VLAN and I am trunking that VLAN to a distribution layer switch, I can ping the gateway on the distribution layer switch for THAT VLAN, But cannot ping the gateway address for the second VLAN I have on the distribution layer switch. I know it is simple, But I have forgotten and just need a push
Also I have a third VLAN set to route traffic not bound for those 2 VLANs out to a router is the statement "ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 172.16.252.2" good enough and do I actually need to create a VLAN for that traffic? and if so, is an access switchport the best option?
is it possible to run a Catalyst 4500 as pure Layer 2 Switch, i.e. disabling "ip routing", but still managing the switch via Fa1, i.e. the defautl mgmtVrf vrf ?I tried the following:
!
no ip routing
!
interface FastEthernet1
ip vrf forwarding mgmtVrf
ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
!
ip route vrf mgmtVrf 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.1.254
ip default-gateway 192.168.1.254
I was not able to reach the Switch even from the same subnet. Only after enabling ip routing I could manage the Switch. I haven't found any command to set ip default-gateway for a vrf. Any workaround to keep routing disabled, but still manageable via VRF?
I have a WLC 3750 with 41 APs. We use Web Authentication with the combination of a layer 2 security feature (WPA/WPA2 with PSK). With this combination some clients have the problem that they get deauthenticated and have to authenticate again while being in an active session. For testing I disabled the layer 2 security feature i.e. I set it to "none" but I left the Web Authentication enabled. With these settings none of the clients has any more problems with getting deauthenticated. They stay online for the entire session.
View 5 Replies View RelatedI've been conducting research on configuring 3 distribution switches in my network which are Cisco Catalyst 4507's to communicate with our core over layer 3. Our core switch which is already configured at Layer 3 for intervlan routing is a Cisco Catalyst 6509.
I've got the configuration portion complete and all devices are able to communicate my only question is about QoS. Do I have to configure QoS at the layer 3 interfaces for voice, if so how is that completed. We have several vlans and separate the vlans for each building by voice and data. We only configure ports on the access switches with voice vlans for QoS and we use the auto qos option on these interfaces.
Cisco 3750 with IP Service Image 12.2.55, Trying to enable Web Authentication on Layer 3 interface:
!
ip auth-proxy name bp_auth_proxy http inactivity-time 60
!
interface GigabitEthernet1/0/5
no switchport
ip address 192.168.1.27 255.255.255.0
ip access-group 101 in
can i configure virtual circuits on cisco layer 2 switch catalyst 2950 ?
View 1 Replies View RelatedDo you have the ability to setup DHCP servers on this layer 3 switch? I know I can with my old 3550 switch. Want to upgrade and make sure this model supports setting up dhcp servers on it.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI've created a scenario using a 3750 cisco as core switch ad other 6 switch model 2900 in access level.my problem is this, the router is not a cisco router, and this router is not able to make NAT on more than one subnet.Into the core switch I've created 4 VLAN and I must to give internet access to 3 of them, 192.168.0.0/24 (vlan1), 172.16.0.0/24 (vlan2), 172.17.0.0/24 (vlan3).I've connected the switch to router via gigabit ethernet 0/1 and I've assigned to this interface ip address 192.168.10.2, the router ip address is 192.168.10.1, Switch ip default-gateway is router ip address 192.168.10.1, ip default route is 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 192.168.10.1 I've enabled ip routing feature and I've set no switchport feature to interface gigabit ethernet 0/1.From core switch I can ping router ip address but I can't make it from all other user, and the users not able to have internet access.
Below the switch configuration (only necessary strings)
version 12.1
no service pad
service timestamps debug uptime
service timestamps log uptime
no service password-encryption
[code].....
We are looking for a solution to avoid VPNs to encrypt data between HQ and Bldgs (point-to-multipoint) Gigabit fiber(untrusted media).Is there any cisco's product providing layer2 encryption over Giga fiber?The HQ has a 6509s and remote bldgs have mixed of 3750s,4500s in trunks.
View 2 Replies View RelatedIs it possible to establish a interface dialer on a layar 3 switch?Or is it only interface for routers?I have a c3750 switch (WS-C3750G-24T), and when i try to establish a dialer interface i get an error message:
[code]...
I am taking an introduction class to CCNA and we are focusing on the Application Layer,and I'm having some difficulty in understanding what is an Application Layer Service. Is the Application Layer Service the same as Application Layer Software?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI'm setting up a Cisco 3750 layer 3 switch with several vlans. I thought enabling routing would route between the vlans, but no such luck.What I want is to share the internet access of vlan 100 with the other vlans/ip-nets.How can I do that?
View 2 Replies View RelatedI Like To Intentionally Create A Layer 2 Loop in My LabI have 2960 and 3750 switches and servers with multiple NIC's and also Some PC's and Hubs. Connections and Commands And Features Which Sould Be Disabled or Enabled)
View 4 Replies View RelatedI've got a bunch of 3750-X switches all running IP Base and acting as a routed access layer. They run OSPF in a totally stubby area with the distribution layer (Nexus 7K) as the ABR. We also have a physically separate management network into which the fa0 management interface of the 3750-X is connected. The management network itself runs OSPF and has multiple subnets and external access.
On the 3750-X, I'd ideally like to be able to run some sort of separate OSPF process for the management network or at the very least have a static default route for management traffic pointing out the fa0 interface, but clearly not have it interfere with the main default route for data traffic coming from the N7K ABR. Normally I'd just create a management VRF, sling the fa0 interface into it and run a separate OSPF process in that VRF. The problem is you can't create VRFs in IP Base! Surely there must be a way to do this? Cisco don't really expect customers to upgrade to IP Services just to have a working OOB Management network, do they?!
My colleague and I have been having a discussion about using rapid spanning tree in the access layer. Most of our infrastructure has been migrated to a routed access layer with 3750s.
The idea was brought up to configure the switches with rapid PVST. On the surface, it seems like a better idea, faster convergence, in the event that spanning tree ends up being used for some reason. My colleague prefers sticking with standard PVST. His argument is that, in the event of a layer 2 loop, some consumer-level switches filter out BPDUs and if the control plane is overwhelmed, the shorter timers of rapid PVST just puts that much more of a burden on the CPU trying to regain control, whereas with standard PVST it will have around 20 seconds before it starts to engage. (It may still be overwhelmed, but the longer timer delays the additional burden.) He says he's seen this problem with rapid PVST and that his opinion is backed up by our Cisco rep. (I haven't spoken to him yet.)
In our model, it should be very rare -- pretty much never -- that we would layer 2 span another switch off of our access stack.
One suggestion I saw is to use BPDU Guard, which is a good suggestion as well.
But we have had experiences with overloading the control plane on a 3750. I believe that concern is valid. If the CPU can't service spanning tree. But I'm interested in hearing about other experiences people have had in terms of rapid spanning tree in the access layer, end users plugging in unauthorized devices and creating loops, and the effects when using rapid spanning tree vs standard spanning tree.
I configure 3750 stack switch as core and 2960 stack switches as access layer switches.I connected my laptop to one of my core stack in VLAN 10 and I am pinging to one of my server in VLAN 1. What will be the minimum latency at the time of inter VALN routing
View 2 Replies View RelatedWe have the next Settings in our SW. We crate an ACL and aplied to a SVI for Incomming Traffic, I understand that is not necesasry to allow the returning traffic in ACL, but we can't access to rdp for example when we add the ACL, if we remove it, the acces is ok, buet when we add again the access is deny, even we have a log entry, and the ACL i just for Incomming traffic. There is no another ACL.
See attached file
[code]...
I have set up an ACL on my 3750 switch to deny icmp from PC A on our inside network to PC B on a different VLAN on our inside network using the following ACLs:
deny icmp host 10.1.17.15 host 10.3.10.4
deny icmp host 10.3.10.4 host 10.1.17.15
-- or --
deny icmp host 10.1.17.15 host 10.3.10.4 echo-replydeny icmp host 10.3.10.4 host 10.1.17.15 echo-reply
These ACLs belong to an access-list that also limits ip traffic to a few specific machines.When I try pinging from PC A I receive a reply message back from PC B. Shouldn't this configuration block any ICMP from PC A to PC B and from PC B to PC A? I would have expected the first ACL statement to block any packets associated with ICMP and when that didn't work I tried the second configuration.
SM-ES3-16-P works as a layer 3 module which means that the uplink which connects to router ( Internally ) is a layer 3 interface . Is there a way we can use it as a layer 2 switch and connect the uplink as a trunk port ?
View 1 Replies View RelatedHere is a second paragraph from official BCMSN book page 93:
View 6 Replies View RelatedI have :
- two different subnets (S1, S2)
- these subnets are connected to an IP backbone via wirelles acces points
I would like to physically connect these subnets together so the networks devices in S1 could directly communicate with the devices in S2 and vice versa without going through the backbone.
The obvious solution seems to interconnect these subnets with a router or a switch L3. But I would like to connect these subnets and stay at layer 2.
So, is it possible to connect S1 and S2 with a switch L2 ? If I do that, what is going to happen? Can I create just one subnet S3 from this two subnets when I connect them together and have my two separate subnets back as soon as I disconnect them?
I need a ≥ 8 port layer 3 managed switch. What would be the cheapest solution for this?I've been looking at some stuff like Cisco 4908G, but that only supports 1000base-X. I need something that supports the standard 1000base-T. I've also looked at a Cisco WS-C3508G-XL-EN, but correct me if I'm wrong, this is only layer 2?
View 11 Replies View Relatedi am trying to do EoMPLS using microwave as my Layer 1. i am doing the same thing using Fiber as my layer 1 and it is working. the minute i use microwave its not working. the EVC will be showing as up, but no traffic will be moving. i am using 2 3750Metro series swicthes. i have tries to tweek the MTU to be above 1500 and below 1500 but nothing is working. LDP is establishing, OSPF is working, but the EVC is just not forwadign traffic from end to end.
View 4 Replies View RelatedI have a question about QoS and how, or if, it functions between a layer 2 switch and a router. My question is, can a frame's COS sent from a layer 2 switch to a router be recognized and converted (mapped) to a DSCP setting without the use of a vlan (not the native vlan1), and can the reverse be done from a router to a layer 2 switch? Can QoS be preserved as it passes through the different devices? I know, pretty basic, but I have to start somewhere.
View 12 Replies View Relatedcan i use normal two L3 Switch(3560) for BGP Multihoming with 2 different isp
View 4 Replies View RelatedN5K will be running on Layer 2 mode. vPC configured between N5K and N2K Servers are part of Vlan 10, 20, 30 and Juniper SRX firewall is the gateway for all the servers. SRK firewall is Active/Standby mode.
Questions are
1) Is there any non-vPC link required between N5K in this scenario?
2) N5K will pass in/out traffic to juniper SRX firewall durining SRX failover as well as normal operation
Data link-ARP,RARP, presentation-SSL,TSL,ASCII,JPG, Session layer-ASP(apple talk session protocol),SCP are these correct?can your provide 2 new protocols for each with the long name?
View 17 Replies View Relatedwhich OSI layer is responsible for error correction nd which method is use for it..as far i have studied i thnk data link layer perform both error detection and correction..?
View 6 Replies View RelatedI managed to narrow down my question to this.SOCKS5 proxy is able to handle both TCP and UDP transport protocols.If I have IPinIP encapsulated tunnel, will this work?
in other words, does SOCKS5 expect Layer 4 header immediately after Layer 3 header or not?