i am first time to trying to make Vlans. I managed to do 2 vlans to SA520 to ports 1 and 2. But when i try to separatethem to SG300 with web management it doesnt work. Vlan 1 works fine, i untagged wanted ports and forbid vlan 2 ports.In Vlan 2 there vice versa, is this right way to do? Both Vlans has their own DHCP range as i do them to SA520.
View 2 RepliesI recently set up a small photography business and am trying to get a Cisco 877 and Cisco SG300-10 switch to talk to each other.
What I want is for the Cisco 877 to handle the internet and the SG300-10 to handle the local network,
I have set up 2 vlans in trunk mode on the switch and want vlan2 to manage local traffic and vlan3 to handle the internet.
I have got the 877 connecting to the internet what I dont have, traffic going to vlan2 on the switch from the 877
Look at the running configs for the switch and the router and tell me how to get the vlan on the router to pass traffic to the switch. In a nutshell I am inserting the internet into the switch but am not sure how to progress. I have the c870-advipservicesk9 image file on the router.
Switch Config
interface gi2
description connection-to-data-vlan
exit
interface gi3
description connection-to-internet-vlan
exit
vlan database (code )
I just got my Cisco SG300 28, but I have some problems getting the routing to work. I get the vlans to get to the router, with the default route. But not getting them to talk with each other. I can ping the IPs from the cisco, but I am not getting traffic to go from vlan 1 to vlan 2. When I try to google, it say that it should do it automatically, and I found no setting for it. It looks like it not creating any route for the interfaces.
View 2 Replies View RelatedI have 2 SG300 switches, in layer3 mode, lag'd together for high availability, serving 2 Dell R815's and a Dell Equallogic 4100 for virtualisation. I have setup a number of vlan's, network traffic, mgmnt traffic, iScsi, vMotion etc and they seem to work.
However, Equallogic unit suddenly became unavailable to view for managment yet maintained iscsi traffic for the servers ok. After much head scratching, noticed that one of my SG300's had the vlan ports assigned to various vlans had *automagically* changed there assignment, ie tagged changed to excluded, but only for one of the iscsi traffic connections and the mgmnt port, both coming from the Equallogic, the other iscsi continued its assignment fine. The other SG300 hasn't changed. Guaranteee no one has been into change it and no changes have been made to Dell servers or Equallogic.
Q. Is there any circumstance where the switch can change the port setup itself? or is there any external circumstance that would trigger that change either?
This has now occured twice. The setup is running as a test lab, not in production until all setup is complete, then it will replace our existing harware.
when I was using image 1.0.0.27, I was able to move the management VLAN from 1 to which ever VLAN I wanted. For some reason, after switching the image to 1.1.1.8, I no longer have that function.
View 1 Replies View RelatedI have setup a WAP321 and configured it for a captive portal. It is connected to a SG300 switch and the gateway is a SA520.The SA520 is setup with two VLANs. The default of ID 1 and a guest vlan ID 2.
The SA520 is assigning the IP addresses to VLAN ID 2. That is working properly.And the captive portal works fine as long as I have Inter VLAN Routing Enabled on VLAN ID 2. But, I do not want VLAN ID 2 to access the local LAN so I Disabled the setting for VLAN ID 2. If I disable captive portal on the WAP321 with Inter VLAN Routing disabled, everything works fine. No access to VLAN ID 1 and Internet access works fine.
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 RelatedMy fiance recently signed up for the Screen-wise Panel for Google research. Basically they monitor your TV usage and your internet usage. As part of the program they installed a Cisco WIFI router. I've got no issue with them logging the sites visited etc but I'm a little worried about them possible collecting private information (banking / work related stuff) that I don't want going out there. According to what I've read what's supposed to happen is they replace your router with the new Cisco router.The "technician" who came in and installed the router was actually a builder and not an IT technician and rather than replace our router he connected the Cisco router into port 4 of our router... I wasn't in at the time.
What I was looking to do is separate Port 4 of my router into a separate VLAN that can access the internet, but not access anything on ports 1-3, or the wireless. However, I want to be able to see everything on port 4 from the other side (in other words I want to see "into" the port 4 VLAN, but don't want them to see out). I also wanted DHCP to assign IP addresses correctly depending on where you were plugged in. In this example the first VLAN (your current router ip address) is going to be on 192.168.1.1, and the second VLAN (the new on we create on port 4) is going to be on 192.168.2.1.This is exactly what I'm looking to do, I could then connect the kids machines / tablets / ipods to the Cisco router and have the main machine and my work laptop on the main router... but I don't have a clue how to do it. </quote> Is this something that I am able to do with the Netgear router I own and is it hard to set up?
We have recently purchased a SG300 to break up our network which most consists of virtual machines via Bridged networking on network machines. I have created successfully Vlans and the physical machines are capable of communicating across the different subnets that I have created via the SG300 however the Virtual machines can no longer be reached.
View 2 Replies View Related i was trying to set up a new SG300-52 L3 switch for switching and Vlan. The problem is that the vlans on this switch cannot get their DNS resolved. Probably a stupid thing i can't get to see, but i think it is a simple solution given switchin is not my expertise.So my setup:
- ISP Wan router: LAN ip 10.0.0.1, DMZ: 10.0.0.2 -> i have to use this router for ISP support. But it suckes, that's why we use own router for firewall, port forwarding etc.
- Nice Router: WAN: 10.0.0.2, LAN: 192.168.1.1
- SG300 L3 switch
This works. I can ping switch, nice router, ISP router and google's ip from VLAN 5.But i cannot ping google using host name. From within SG300 i can. So it has something to do with SG300 not doing DNS right.My Client on VLAN 5 has ip 10.1.1.5 / 24, default gateway and dns pointing to switch: 10.1.1.1.I have put an entry in DNS servers in SG300: 192.168.1.1 active (pointing to Nice router). On client leave default gateway pointing to switch. But put DNS server : 192.168.1.1
I have a connection on IP 192.168.1.21, Subnet 255.255.255.0 - this is on the default VLAN1 on the switch. I need to route this to IP 10.0.3.101, Subnet 255.255.252.0 - which is set up on VLAN2 on the switch. I have set the switch to Layer 3 via console.
how I setup this route? I am use the Browser based interface.
configure my new SG300-28P. When I have started the switch, I have specified a new password and enabled telnet in order to setup the switch in Layer 3 mode.
After a restart, the switch took its IP address from a DHCP server. When I try to set a static IP address (192.168.2.1), I receive the following error message: Duplicated IP interface on the same subnet.
The IP address 192.168.2.1 is not used by any device within the network. For information, the message doesn't appear when the switch is in Layer 2 mode.
why I can't change the IP address of default vlan in Layer 3 mode ? All I can do is set the IP address to static or dynamic.
For test purpose, I have added 2 vlans. But I wasn't able to route traffic between vlan. how to configure the switch to route traffic between vlan?
find below details informations about my VLANs.
- Default (VLAN ID 1)
IP Address : 192.168.2.1
Subnet : 255.255.255.0
[Code].....
Is PVID the same thing as "native vlan"? Can the native VLAN be changed on a SA520? Currently I believe it to be 1, I'd like to change the native VLAN to 10.
I have a scenario where I have a prexisting production LAN of 192.168.1.0/24 . It's a small organization (a church), but they purchased 3 Aironet 1130ag units. They want to have a "private" WLAN that is part of 192.168.1.0/24 , and a guest WLAN of a different subnet (I chose 192.168.20.0/24) . The two should never meet. There will likely never be a guest computer connected via ethernet. Guest computers would always have to connect wirelessly.
I left VLAN 1 on the SA520 192.168.75.0/24 subnet as default.I created a VLAN 10 , 192.168.1.0/24 subnet, and I created a VLAN 20, 192.168.20.0/24 subnet.Ports 1-3 of the SA520 are members of VLAN 1, 10, and 20 (cannot remove membership of VLAN1, which is pretty annoying).
Both are secured by WPA, and when I connect, the proper DHCP subnet passes from the firewall through to the wireless client, for each respective SSID.Ultimately, I'd like the SBS 2003 server to handle DHCP for VLAN 10, and have the SA520 handle DHCP for VLAN 20, but i'll take what I can get.
The original production LAN is connected via an unmanged switch.I'd like to trunk the unmanaged switch to Port 4 on the SA520. However, since the PVID (native vlan?) of SA520 is 1, and I cannot make Port 4 on the SA520 ony a member of VLAN 10, then anything traffic coming from the unanaged switch will automatically be tagged with VLAN1, correct? Thus causing the already existing production network to start receiving DHCP from the firewall in the 192.168.75.0/24 range.
We have 2 separate networks here, 1 for data (192.168.0.x) and 1 for VOIP phones (192.168.3.x).
I need them to both be connected to different ports on a switch (Cisco SG 300 10 port managed switch) which is then linked to another switch (Cisco Catalyst 2960 48 port switch). Then on this 2960 switch I want the link to be split back into the 2 separate networks. I think that I need to create 2 separate VLANs and assign them to different ports.
My organization wishes to host a LAN gaming event. The setup I have in mind involves a 24-port switch for connecting all the player computers and having that switch connected to a smaller "core" switch which has the the game server and router connected to it. I'd like to know if I can set things up as follows...
SG200-26 with ports 1-24 on seperate VLANs so they cannot talk to eachother. I'd then like ports 25 and 26 to be an aggregated (for bandwidth and redundancy) trunk port to carry all 24 VLANs plus an additional management VLAN (ex. VLAN 100) that will be used for accessing the switch. I'd like those aggregated trunk ports to connect to an SG300-10 "core" switch which will be connected to the game server and to a router for internet access.
I'd like the ability to have two network connections from the game server to the switch, one on the management VLAN and one on a different VLAN (ex. VLAN 50) that will be accessed by the players (ports 1-24 on the SG200-26). The core switch needs the ability to perform restricted inter-VLAN routing, in that it doesn't allow VLANs 1-24 to talk to eachother but they can talk to the server's VLAN but only through specific service ports (ex. port 12345, 12346). Is this possible?
Furthermore how would I configure the SG300-10 to allow VLANs 1-24 to talk to VLAN 50, but not themselves or VLAN 100. As well, I'll probably have the router on it's own VLAN (ex. VLAN 60) and allow VLANs 1-24 to access it but only through HTTP port 80 for web access.
Our VMware guys want to use shared networking infrastructure to create a DMZ on a network.
[ASA (subif;VLAN 4)] <-trunk-> [DMZ Switch] <-trunk-> [LAN Core Switch] <-trunk-> [ESX vSwitch] <-VLAN 4-> [VM]
The DMZ Switch does not participate in VTP with the LAN but will have a VLAN ID created (same VLAN ID used from VM to ASA) No vlan interface will be created for the vlan
Is this a bad idea from a security or otherwise point of view? i.e. Best practices that should be followed here? Should I configure the link between the LAN Core Switch and DMZ switch as access ports so the port on each switch is forced to be on one specific vlan? I was going to use allowed vlans command to limit the vlans that can pass on it and possibly vtp pruning for all vlans.
We are thinking of following classic design, would Nexus 5K can have 2 seperate connections to each VDC? Nexus 7K w/ different VDC (Internal / DMZ ) Can Nexus 5K have a VPC connection to Nexus 7K to Internal VDC as well as DMZ VDC, and seperate traffic?
View 3 Replies View RelatedHow do I configuring Private Class A [10.206.90.0/24] and Private Class C [192.168.1.0/24] Network on Cisco 3550-12G Switch.
View 3 Replies View RelatedI'm new at this stuff and very stumped. I have one WAP with multiple SSIDs that support VLAN ID (for a private and guest wireless network) and a managed switch that supports tag or port based VLAN ID. How do I set up the switch so that the networks are separate, but can still reach their own routers to get on the Internet? In case details are necessary, the WAP is a Cisco Aironet 1130AG and the switch is a Netgear FS750T2
View 14 Replies View RelatedWe have two switches; a WS-C3550-48 and a WS-C3548-XL connected via fiber uplink ports. Both switches are on the same subnet 192.168.1.0 /24. I would like to change the subnet of the second switch, WS-C3548-XL, to be on 192.168.2.0 /24. Would it be possible to assign 192.168.2.x IP addresses to both uplink ports to achive this?
Or would I need to create a separate VLAN and assign both GigabitEthernet0/1 uplink ports to this VLAN?
I've just started out playing with a Cisco 1800 router to gain some knowledge of Cisco devices before taking a CCNA. I also have a 2950 switch but will start with the router.
I'm using an Android phone as a wireless Internet access point. This issues IP addresses by DHCP in the 192.168.43.x range with 255.255.255.0 subnet.
Also I have a Linksys WRT54G router running DD-WRT firmware acting as a wireless bridge to the Android phone, and it has 4 LAN ports.
This bridge is up and running and I have successfully connected my laptop to the Linksys for testing and can use the Internet provided by the phone.
Connected to the Linksys is a Cisco 1800 router. Connected to the router is my Citrix XenServer PC and a NAS box.
The XenServer and NAS are on another network 07.05.19.x range with 255.0.0.0 subnet using their own static IPs. One of the virtual clients on the XenServer will be a DHCP server to service other virtual clients. All still in the 07.05.19.x range.
Basically I want the devices on the 07.05.19.x IP range to be able to use the Internet gateway at 192.168.43.1 to access the Internet.
How would I set up my 1800 to achieve this?
Also, am I right in understanding that the 1800 will ignore DHCP leases from the Android phone due to it being a Layer 3 device.
Between our hosting and a customer we have an extended vlan, traveling on a fiber, between two cisco 3560 switches.The thing is, that we want to create one or more vlans inside that extended vlan, in some way if possible?
View 3 Replies View RelatedI have two networks at two sites with a dot1q trunk between the two L3 switches at both sites (no routers involved)
SITE A - Cisco 3750 L3 - VLAN ID 50
10.10.50.0/24
SITE B - Cisco 3750 L3 - VLAN ID 50
10.20.50.0/24
I would like to extend the SITE A VLAN to SITE B so that I can move hosts from SITE A to SITE B without needing to change their IP address but the vlan ID is already in use. Obviously the easy solution is to change the VLAN ID for one or other of the sites but both sites contain hosts that run 24/7. Is there a way to join two VLANs with different IDs together.So for example I create a new VLAN 60 at SITE B and associate it with VLAN 50 at SITE A.
i need to solves this little problem on 2960S lan BASE but i dont know if it is possible.
Uplink port config for gi 1/0/28 is:
switchport mode trunk
switchport trunk alloved vlan 10,11
but on interface gi 1/0/1 i want to have data from vlan 10 tagged as VLAN 20.
At this time i have solved this issue very primitively
I have set up gi 1/0/2 as int mode acces, acces vlan 20 and i have connected gi 1/0/2 with gi 1/0/3 with eth cable. int gi 1/0/3 is switchpor mode acces, switchport acces vlan 10
in my network i got a switch with 4 vlan's configured
-vlan 10
-vlan 20
-vlan 30
-vlan 40
in vlan 40 i have my domain controller for my existing domain.i have read that seperate vlan's can't have contact without a lollipop router ( router on a stick, inter vlan routing)i want that users in vlan 10, vlan 20 and vlan 30 can have access to my domain controller in vlan 40
but they can't have access to each other.
My problem, in a nutshell, is that clients do not get an IP from an external DHCP server when connected to a guest VLAN.
My current setup is:
Native VLAN 1 (192.168.2.x)
2008 DHCP Servers
2504 WLC
[Code].....
The guest WLAN just uses WPA and a PSK and is set to interface vlan101 There rest of the 2504 config is default.
The ports that the WLC and APs are connected to are tagged on the correct VLANs. (is that even necessary for the AP now?)
Ive changed the interface config around a hundred times now with no luck. No matter what a client will not get an IP.
Could this be due to the 2504 and ASA both acting as DHCP relays? Ive tried setting the IP of the DHCP on the dynamic interface to many different things with no luck.
I have a WRVS4400N that broadcasts two different SSIDs. One is a public network and the second is a private network. Right now, both SSIDs are pulling from the same DHCP server, but I would like to separate the public from the private. How can I separate these SSIDs by vlans? I can't seem to get the vlans to route to separate ports.
This is my vlan settings. I have two DHCP servers right now. One is in an isolated network plugged into Port 3 of the WRVS4400N. The other is on the production network, plugged into port 1 of the WRVS4400N. For some reason, whenever I connect to SSID Public, it won't pull an IP from the DHCP on port 1, it only pulls it from the one on port 2.
I know there is three SSIDs here, the Static one is going to be the same network as the EMS one.
I have a 3750G switch in my production network that only has VLAN 1 on it. All ports are in a default state and VLAN 1 is disabled. The switch is passing traffic but shouldn't having the default VLAN shut down cause the ports not to pass traffic? If I start to create VLANs will that cause the switch to stop passing traffic?
View 4 Replies View RelatedI am trying to setup a L2tpv3 VLAN-to-VLAN tunnel.My setup has two Cisco 890 router with Cisco IOS Software version 15.0(1) M4. These routers are connected directly on FastEthernet port 8.
One linux machine is connected on FastEthernet port 0 on each router. The two linux machines are on same vlan. I am trying to establish a vlan-to-vlan tunnel between the routers and send traffic between the linux machines.
I followed the case study 11.4 from [URL] and configured the l2tp-class and pseudowire-class. However, the vlan interface configuration is different on 890 router.
I configured a vlan interface as follows.
(config)#vlan 200
(config)# interface FastEthernet 0
#shutdown
#switchport access vlan 200
(config)# interface vlan 200
I don't see the 'xconnect' command in this context. What's wrong with my configuration?
We have a low bandwith (15-20 Mbit/s) to the ASA from our Client vlan. If i connect the Client to the same vlan as the ASA is, the bandwith (90 Mbit/s) is good.
Here are the Layer 3 Design:
Client -> vlan 2 - Switch - vlan 7 -> vlan 1 - ASA 5505 -> ISP
The Layer 2 Design:
Client -> Gig2/0/13 - Switch - Gig4/0/43 -> Eth0/1 ASA5505 -> ISP
IP Address:
Client: 172.16.2.10Vlan2: 172.16.2.1Vlan7: 172.16.7.1ASA: 172.16.7.2
I assuming the switch has a problem with routing ?It is a stacked Switch with following members:
switch 1 provision ws-c3750g-12sswitch 2 provision ws-c3750g-24tsswitch 3 provision ws-c3750g-24tsswitch 4 provision ws-c3750x-48
And we have following error message in the log from the switch:
%PLATFORM_UCAST-4-PREFIX:
One or more specific prefixes could not be programmed into TCAM and are being covered by a less specific prefix, and the packets may be software forwarded I first get the idea that the switch is overloaded with router traffic. Thats why i assuming i have to check the sdm templates, but i'm not sure if this resolves the issue.
Here are the relevant config:
ASA Interface on the Switch:
interface GigabitEthernet4/0/43description ASA-inside LANswitchport access vlan 7switchport mode accessspanning-tree portfast
Client Interface on the Switch:
interface GigabitEthernet3/0/1switchport access vlan 2switchport mode accessswitchport port-securityswitchport port-security aging time 2switchport port-security violation restrictswitchport port-security aging type inactivitymacro description cisco-desktopspanning-tree portfastspanning-tree bpduguard enable
[code]...
Currently we have an Ava ya IP Office switch running on the same network as our PC clients. I would like to seperate the two network into 2 V LAN's.
We have a mixture of Catalyst 3750 switches and some older 3500 models.Where do I start? Should I leave the PC's and servers on the default V LAN and just move the IP handsets?
I have to configure failover Active/Standby on my ASA 5510.I am wondering how i could do for the outside interface, i mean, actually the ASA1 outside interface is linked directly to our Internet router.So now if i have to add ASA2 connecting to that router i will need a switch between them.I have already a switch for DMZ & LAN.The thing is that i will have to allow 3 switchs ports to communicate with each others.
- 1 for ASA1--outside
- 1 for ASA2--outside
- 1 for Internet router
How could i isolate these 3 ports to make them communicate alone ? Should i use VLAN for that ?And if i use VLAN, will this require to make any change of configuration on my firewalls (ASA1 & ASA2) outside interface ?I am a bit lost with this, if i am correct i will not have to do some "vlan tagging" on the firewall itself ?
We were going to create a 2 port, layer 3 etherchannel between a 1002 router and a 3750X layer 3 core switch. We wanted to create bunled link between them but, now we are going to be putting a Riverbed device between the router and core switch. Because of this, would it be best to abandon the idea of creating a layer 3 etherchannel and just have 2 links from the router and core switch and have traffic load balance between the 2 links?The Riverbed will have 2 connections into it from the Core switch and 2 connections into it from the 1002 router. I was hoping to keep the layer 3 etherchannel but, do you think it would be best to create 2, /29 nets and have the router/Riverbed and Core Switch/Riverbed load balance.
View 5 Replies View Related