Cisco Switching/Routing :: 3750 To Connect Routed Interfaces And Vrf Design
Sep 26, 2012
I would like to do the following architecture with the same C3750 : network X,Y,Z connected to 3750 in VRF D the 3750 uses a routed interface on subnet E for the default route in VRF D on this routed interface a BYPASS EQUIPMENT the other BYPASS EQUIPMENT interface is connected also to another routed interface on subnet E "also" this routed interface is in another VRF C with other network A and B.do you know if it will work because of 2 routed interfaces on the same IP subnet or is there a way to do that ? the only goal for me is to catch traffic from network X,Y,Z on SYN and ACK.
We are currently designing a complete Layer 3 to the edge solution for our customers. The network design is a combination of a collapsed core (Core to access) as well as a three layer model (Core/Distro/Access) for connectivity to the Data Centre, Internet and Wireless Blocks.
The core of the network contains two 6509E switches interconnected on a Layer 3 Port channel (no VSS). Access Layer switches (3750 Stacks) connect to the core switches over p2p routed links (Collapsed core part of the design). Distribution layer switches provide connectivity to the Data centre, Internet and Wireless Blocks.(three layer model.
All IP addressing is being planned for assignment from the private RFC 1918 address block(10.0.0.0/8) for both Infrastructure and Access layer VLANs for users.
I'm trying to configure a SPAN session on a Cisco 3725 router, but it won't let me complete the command. The router has two Fast Ethernet interfaces: 0/0 and 0/1. I'm trying to configure a SPAN session with Fa0/0 as the source interface and Fa0/1 as the destination interface. [code] But when I try to configure the session, it seems like it's giving me the option to configure the SPAN session, but in the end the router won't let me: [code] When I type "?", why would it give me the option of using the Fast Ethernet interface as source port, then when I try to execute the command, it doesn't like it?
I'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?!
What should the duplex mode to be set on a routed port gi0/21 that are running HSRP ? I try setting the gi0/21 to full, but it caused the port to be down. The only way for the port to be up is setting it to half duplex.
Cisco 3750 Switch ============== interface GigabitEthernet0/21 no switchport ip address 10.200.104.34 255.255.255.248
On a router I can use IP Accounting or Netflow to see what kind of traffic is moving over an interface. Are there any tools on a 3750 switch with a routed interface which would tell you who is hogging the bandwidth on that interface?
I have a typical LAN environment that spans across a large warehouse. I have done a lot of redesigning of the environment to satisfy the need for a disaster recover plan. I now have created a LAN with multiple v lans and must also connect all the access layer switches back to the core switch where the servers are.
I was thinking of something simple such as Port channel of 2 Gbps across the backbone and simple floating static routes . I have then moved my wan access link to a 3750 and implemented routing a CEF at each of the 3 core switches (blue). My question is more of design.
I'm working designing a switch system for our core/data center.
We have 5 esx hosts, 2 sans with 3 nodes each. We have voice servers, a couple of routers and a few odds and ends. There are 7 other locations aggregating into this data center via 1-2gbps fiber connections. The bandwidth usage on these links is minimal, but there is a total of about 3000 devices aggregating into the system. My main concern right now is the 3560G's are seeing many output drops, due to the small buffer size on those switches. I have been looking at couple of options to resolve this issue, including the 4948E, 4507E, and 3750X switches.
Budget being the biggest factor, I am finding that the 4507 might be out of the price range. So I was leaning towards the 4948E switches for connecting the servers and iscsi san's as the 3750X is not recommended for iscsi. Redundancy is important so I would like to have two. The second concern is that I need to aggregate the fiber connections and for that I was looking at the ME-3600X or possibly the WS-C3750X-12S-E. I'm running eigrp, so this switch would need to have full routing, as it would also serve as the core switch for the 4948E's.
So in the end I was thinking that two 4948E switches up linked to the ME-3600X which would do full routing for the fiber aggregation and any routing needed for the servers and sans.
Servers and Sans_________4948E________ME-3600X_________7 fiber connections |____________4948E_____________|
I would look at a second ME-3600X in the future for redundancy. This is the lowest cost biggest buffer solution that I could find.
I am just browsing and looking for a solution to converge my multi-vendor switched network and bring some redundancy to it as recently we managed to get a redundant links. I have a need to change core switch to Cat3750G, which has Per-V LAN-RSTP+ on board, but tests have shown that it won't be compatible with some other proprietary per-V LAN RSTP solution other vendor's switches use currently.
So, I thought maybe standard-based MSTP design might do the trick. I've made some tests and got some weird and unstable switching result. I have two topology rings with a core switch in the center. Every ring has about 10 switches, so practically network diameter may vary from 5 switches (when spanning-tree converges in the center and I have a blocking port somewhere int the middle of the ring) to about 10-11 switches (if a I have link failure on any of ports right at the core switch). I disconnected one port from core switch to eliminate a possible switching loop while I will be configuring new MSTP design. Then I started enabling MSTP on all the switches staring from core Cat3750G to MSTP, one by one, placing all switches to the same MSTP region, and placing all V LAN's to default MSTI0(CIST) cause I don't need to organize any separate MSTP instances for every V LAN or for group of V LAN s. When I turned MSTP on on 7th or 8th switch in the chain (cause I had a physical chain when I disconnected one port out of redundant ring) I got all switches "flapping", storming and flooding the network with broadcasts. Even when I had one redundant port disabled.
I have no idea what I am doing wrong. I noticed that Cat3750G has an option that defines a possible network diameter which actually automatically changes some hello, max age etc. attributes according to diameter specified. When I defined a maximum network diameter of 7, if didn't change anything: I still have hello timer of 2 sec etc. I've been wondering if the maximum network diameter has something more than just a "variable" to fine tune hello timers etc? Maybe I won't be able to use MSTP in my network which might have diameter more that 7 switches. Or maybe it was a mistake of placing all the switches to the same region and all the v LAN s to the default MSTI0 (CIST) and I should configure one MSTI per V LAN or per some group of V LANs and subdivide my switches to few MSTP regions?
I'm having some trouble getting my head round the following but I think it's routing related?
I have a Cisco 3750 switch with the following configured:
interface Vlan1 ip address 192.168.0.223 255.255.254.0 no ip route-cache
The 3750 is connected to a firewall which handles the routing. From the 3750 I can only ping remote networks from the vlan1 interface not from vlan6,8 or 10 i.e ping 10.34.37.101 (remote network) source 192.168.0.223 (vlan1) works but ping 10.34.37.101 source 10.74.10.1 (vlan10) does not? I can ping 10.34.37.101 from computers on the various vlans but not from the 3750 it self.
I looked at setting a default gateway for the various vlan interfaces
Current topology in network is such: web servers with content needing to be load balanced are in vlan 35 and these servers are directly connected to Core switch (two 6509 VSS) via 20 Gb EtherChannel. Vlan 35 also spans some other switches with other servers residing in this vlan. Additionally, there are dozens of another vlans (including external users) that need to communicate with web servers. IP addresses of these two web servers are: 192.168.35.1/24 and 192.168.35.2/24 accordingly with default gateway 192.168.35.254/24 (SVI on Core switch). Currently these ip addresses are used by management and other purposes and need to be reachable for same purposes after configuring load balancing with ACEs - it is needed to have direct access to servers behind ACE. How I can do that using ACE in routed mode?
We have two multilayer switches and only one ASA 5520. I'd like to connect ASA in the way described on the picture: each redundant interface includes two physical ones, which are connected to different switches
My question is what kind of link it is necessary to have between switches to make this idea work? I'd have subinterfaces like Re1.100, Re2.200 and so on for my traffic.
I understand that correct design approach is to have two redundant firewalls with failover but we cannot purchase the second one yet.
just have few questions about designing WLC 5508. The scenario is that currently one of the client has a firewall Tie ring T1 internet facing and T2 internal which has multiple DMZ connected. T2 firewall has a DMZ switch connected which has a router which connects to MPLS cloud to different site across the country. (around 10 sites) all static routing. Now the client is thinking to deploy wireless at all 10 sites using H-REAP. The issue is that client has only one WLC and they are not willing to buy other as i was thinking to deploy two WLC one for corporate and one for guest users. (one in internal network and on in DMZ). Now my question is as follow.
1- Keeping in mind that there is only one WLC where should i physically put it? 2- How guest users will work ? How the authentication will be done? 3-There are 8 SFP ports in WLC how physical topology will look like? 4-How many V LANs i have to make for wireless users will that be 10? (1 at each site) ?
My last question is that how these ports work on WLC are they just like switch e.g one port can be assigned to different v lan....just confuse about interfaces and vlans on WLC (interfaces concept).
Quick question here. Using 3750E series switches with multiple VLANS configured. These switches serve as our 'core'. I have SVIs configured for the different VLANs and add inbound ACLs in each of the SVIs to control traffic between VLANS. This switch also terminates a P2P Ethernet link which connects to our Colo facility. The port used for this is configured as an L3 port. I noticed today that I was able to send traffic across this L3 link that I thought should have been blocked by an ACL I had in place but it wasn't. So the traffic flowed from a port in say VLAN 20 across this L3 link (assigned with an IP address). Would this traffic flow not cause traffic to be checked against an ACL applied in the inbound direction on the SVI of VLAN 20 (int vlan 20)? Traffic does get checked when routing between SVIs. Why would it not get checked when routing between SVI and L3 interface?
I have a collapsed core design with routed ports between all components. Access layer switches, data center switches, core/aggregation. All routed (no spanning-tree at all).Now...I have to add an IBM BladeCenter with a BNT layer 3 switch to my topology. However, those nasties don't seem to support routed ports.How can I have a routed port on my cisco switch and a standard access port on the BNT and still establish an adjacency with an SVI? I am running OSPF, but I am labbing this in my home lab with 2 x 3550s and EIGRP.
On SW2: *Mar 1 00:57:00.711: EIGRP: Received HELLO on Vlan100 nbr 10.1.1.1 *Mar 1 00:57:00.711: AS 999, Flags 0x0, Seq 0/0 interfaceQ 0/0 iidbQ un/rely 0/0 peerQ un/rely 0/1 *Mar 1 00:57:02.303: EIGRP: Sending UPDATE on Vlan100 nbr 10.1.1.1, retry 9, RTO 5000 tid 0 *Mar 1 00:57:02.303: AS 999, Flags 0x1, Seq 17/0 interfaceQ 0/0 iidbQ un/rely 0/0 peerQ un/rely 0/1
We have 2 sites, each with 2 x 4506 switches which will be connected togther using an etherchannel. The switches will provide access ports for client devices and will be configured with HSRP to provide gateway redundancy. SW1 will be HSRP active.2 metro ethernet links will be installed in each site which will connect back to our HQ sites. OSPF will be used over the backbone to provide resiliency and to allow shortest path routing to each HQ and to prevent traffic over the HQ to HQ link.
The 4506 will be trunked togther with an SVI for providing OSFP adjacency.For the traffic flow from SW2 to HQ2, traffic will hit SW1 and then route back to SW2 and then to HQ2. Is this the best way to do this? Should a second link be connected between switches just for routing or should something like GLBP be used?
We have remote office where we have 2921 router with 6 layer 2 switches. We have few servers which need to be in specific vlan.
2921 router does not have switching engine we are using this to support VOIP.
So on 2921 router i created 6 sub interfaces for each vlan and assign them to their specfic vlans. Then I have trunk connection to switch 1. Now switch 1 connects to all other switches in the network. As our company design all layer 2 switches should be transparent mode. i tested them i can ping from one switch to all other switches.
Router vtp mode i set to transparent mode and from all switches i can ping the router sub interfaces.
if the above design is acceptable how does the routers know which one is active and which one is standby ? if we need a direct connection between two routers they have to be on a seperate subnet and routers dont allow broadcasts - so how will hsrp work on routers ?
We are designing a LAN Network for ourselves.The proposed design is as follows:
4 x 2960S switches in a Stack Access-Stack-I 4 x 2960S-PoE switches in a second Stack Access-Stack-II
2 x 3750X switches in a Stack Core-Stack
Now I would like to connect it in the following manner ?First,I would like to use EtherChannel using the 10Gig LinksSecondly, I would like to use Cross-Stack EtherChanel too.I have given a graphical illustration of the connectivity Now my Qs: a) Will the 2960S supports EtherChannel using the 10G links and the 3750X too... b) Does the proposed solution will work... or It will have any problems.
QoS design problem that I have. I have a client that is deploying new 4507 series switches with SUP6Es. The client will be running lots of voice, streaming video, and video conferencing over the LAN and want to base QoS on Cisco Media net recommendations.
I need to design a new QoS policy with focus on the above media services with basic queuing for critical data services. I have read the Media net design guide and the suggested 12-class model will be too complex to start with but I have seen references to start with a 8-class model with the ability to easily migrate to 12-class in the future. The 8-class model meets all of our requirements but I need to understand how this will work with the 4507 queuing model? [URL]
I've been tasked to come up with a design to segment our internal network to reduce broadcast domain size. In addition, we are running out of DHCP available DHCP addresses. I need to have a solution that will give me more available IP's, but reduce our broadcast domain.
We are Cisco VoIP shop. Our current environment consists of dual 6509 chassis in a VSS config. We have 10 access switches that are model 3750's. Each 3750 has dual 1Gb fiber links to the VSS Core in an etherchannel configuration. We have 2 VLANS (data and voice) that spread throughout every switch. Both VLAN's have their own DHCP scope.
Our current broadcast domain is a 255.255.248.0, so we have over 2000 potential broadcast devices. Cisco recommends not having larger than 512. So my research has brought me to a design as follows:
MY DESIGN: > Have individual voice and data VLANs for each closet switch. > We have 10 closet switches so this would require 20 new vlans > With every separate VLAN we would need a different DHCP scope. > Configure 20 new DHCP scopes for the 20 new VLANs. > Each DHCP scope would have a 512 available addresses. > Enable IP Routing and configure EIGRP on the VSS Core and 3750's. > I'm tossing around the idea of have each 3750 be an EIGRP Stub. Not sure yet.
QUESTIONS: 1. How to verify what I described in my design? 2. Any alternative solution that might be less complicated than configuring Layer 3 on all my access switches? 3. Any thoughts on configuring EIGRP Stub vs. having the VSS Core do all the work? 4: Any template that I could base my 3750 config from?
Actually i have 7600 router and all trafic passes through Gi0/1(Routed port) interface to 6500 series switch. I need to create a vlan on this router eg. vlan 10 Any how it is possible assign a vlan to routed port and traffic of wan interfaces and the vlan traffic passed together.
I have made a routed port on 3560G Switch and defined a pool 172.28.4.62 255.255.255.192 and connected to E1 converter RAD (4E1 to 4 FE) the E1 media is through Microwave on the other end same E1 converter is connected through layer 2 switch and defined a pool as of routed port configured in 3560G switch.
The port is generating lot of giants and after a while it also distrubs other routes ( Port1 to Port 16), configured with Vlan11 and port 22 as routed port.I have checked the routed port through wireshark the maximum frame size is 1514 and configured the MTU to 1514, giants are not showing any more but after 10 to 12 hours switch gets hang. Either to shut the port or to reload the switch to get switch and other layer routes to be normal.
I have checked speed and duplex settings same as E1 converter. Full duplex. 100 Speed. Why switch is not behaving normal. If I shutdown the routed port it is normal.
1. interface GigabitEthernet0/22 no switchport ip address 172.28.4.62 255.255.255.192 flowcontrol receive on end
I have Cisco 3560x layer 3, but there is one problem with MAC ACL. Here is sample scenario:
I have two V LANS 2 & 3. There is one device (D1) on V LAN 2 and three (D2,D3,D4) devices on V LAN 3. D1 can talk only to D2 and D3. D4 can talk only to D2 and D3. D1 and D4 cannot talk at all. I got the IP access list all set, but I was asked to get the MAC ACL on it. The problem is that as soon as packet is routed, its MAC addresses will change, correct? Is there way of preventing device with same IP but different MAC from talking to device it should not to, keeping in mind that the packet will be routed?
Currently we have a 50mb pipe with our carrier SONIC. We have signed another contract with another provider here in town (Charter) to multihome our Internet connections in an active/active configuration. We have leased our /24 space through our carrier SONIC. ARIN has already approved our org-ID for an ASN and they will be sending us that once the billing portion is finished.
There a few design considerations I was hoping I could get some insight from the community on.. Before I start, the ultimate goal for us to use BOTH Internet connections in an active/active configuration - utilizing both pipes..
Disclaimer: I have gathered this design from a lot of other posts that have somewhat of a similiar topology with ASA-->3750-->router pair-->CPE--internet...
What kind of routes should I get from each carrier? I have been told that partial/partial routes plus a default route form each carrier is the way to go. Also, I've heard mention that full routes from both carriers are preferred. My ASR1001's can support ~500k routes. I know the global table is approximately ~337k routes. My goal is to use both pipes and use the best outbound path per carrier.
We will be leasing our /24 space from SONIC. I plan on running OSPF on the DC-Edge-SW1 in conjunction with iBGP - so I can default originate two equal cost routes back to my ASA. My confusion is when the traffic hits DC-Edge-SW1, there will be default equal-cost iBGP routes to both ASR1001's (DC-Edge-RT1 & DC-Edge-RT2). If the switch does not have the BGP table, it will just load-share across both ASR's. When the traffic hits the ASR's, will they know which carrier has the best path and route accordingly?
Should the iBGP connection between both routers be directly connected ? Or will it suffice through the L3 3750 connection? Also, with the limitations on the routes for the ASR1001 at ~500k. If we end up getting full routes from carriers and create a iBGP neighborship between both routers, will this exceed the route limitations on this platform? On both routes, I will have the network statement 'network 184.108.40.206 mask 255.255.255.0.' This is a leased network from SONIC, and we NAT everything on our ASA to 220.127.116.11. My question is, will this be a problem broadcasting this network from our AS to both carriers AS? Refer to bgp-design.jpg - is it a requirement that I use our leased public subnet 18.104.22.168/24 for the interfaces from ASA5510 -> 3750 -> ASR1001?
I am trying to use a SF302-08P switch to connect a conference phone (Cisco 7937) to my infrastructure. I connected the G2 port on the SF302 to a Gig copper port on the Catalyst. I configured both ports as trunked ports and port e1 on the SF302 as an access port for the phone. VLAN 1 is the default VLAN and VLAN 10 for voice. However, the phone does not connect to the Call Manager. I have changed the configurations on the G2 trunked port and the ethernet port (trunked ports, general ports, tagged and untagged). I have also changed the configuration on the Ethernet port (general, access, trunk, set it on the default VLAN, in the voice VLAN, etc.) The SF302 connects to the Catalyst, and PCs connect OK.