Private-VLan Cisco 2975

Hi guys,
     I got an issue configuring Private-VLans on a cisco 2975 i know that it's not supported but it's there a way that i can configure a switchport on a Cisco 2975 switch and be able to communicate witch a Private-VLan on a 3750 switch

Hi Eduardo,
To prune a set of VLANs from a trunk manually, you should use the command
switchport trunk allowed vlan remove vlan-list
If, for example, 100 was the primary VLAN and 101, 102, 103 and 199 were the secondary VLANs associated with this primary VLAN, the command would be:
switchport trunk allowed vlan remove 100-103,199
Be careful when you do this in your production network. This command will cause that these VLANs are immediately disallowed on this trunk. If there are any clients in the removed VLANs on the 2975 switch, they will lose connectivity with the remainder of the network until you configure a separate connection between the 3750 and the 2975 placed into the particular secondary community VLAN.
Best regards,
Peter

Similar Messages

  • Private VLAN support on Cisco SF220

    Hi!
    is there a plan to add support of Private VLANs on SF220?

    Hi,
    We currently do not have plans to support Private VLANs.

  • Hi all, need advice on OSPF and private vlans

    Hi all.
    I have a project to complete and need some help on the possible solution I can use.
    Basically we have ospf area 0 and the users in question are in ospf area 7 and is a stub.
    I need to route the traffic from these users out through area 0 through 3 core devices, onto an external firewall interface to be placed onto the vpn that sits on it. The firewall is not included in the ospf domain.
    My thinking was that the firewall has a default route back into the ospf domain so dont need to worry about traffic coming in, however my job is to segregate these users and take them out of our core network and place them onto an external network via this vpn.
    Not sure how to achieve this apart from static routing redistributed but surely this does not seperate their traffic only points the route to ospf?!
    I was thinking I might have to use private vlans or policy routing but when I try policy routing the policy gets ignored due to normal forwarding.
    Any help and advice would be greatly appreciated.
    Cheers
    Steve

    Steve
    Thanks, that helps.
    GRE is defintely out because apart from the 6500 GRE tunneling is not supported on the Cisco switches.
    It's good that area 7 is only for these users and not mixed up with other users.
    So if i understand correcty the 4500 interface connecting to the 6500 is in area 0 and the interface connecting to the 3550 is in area.
    Or is the 3550 connected to both areas and the 4500 totally in area 0 ?
    Can you confirm the above ?
    In terms of keeping them separate there are 2 possible choices. You can either -
    1) use VRF-LIte, although i'm not sure whether the HP switch would support this. With VRF-Lite you are in effect creating virtual devices on the same physical device. This means each virtual device has it's own routing and forwarding table so it is quite secure because you would only populate the routing table with the routes needed so there would be no way for users to jump to thes rest of your networks.
    The downside is that is can become quite complex to configure. If the 4500 is only used to connect are 7 to area 0 then that would not be a problem but the connection from the 6500 to the HP could and i don't even know whether the HP supports VRF-Lite functionality let alone how to configure it on that switch.
    But it would, at least from the 4500 to 6500 to HP provide complete separation in terms of routing and forwarding. Once it got to the HP it wouldn't but that might not be an issue.
    2) Use PBR (possibly together with acls). This is easier to configure ie. you configure PBR on the 4500 and the 6500 to get the traffic to the HP switch. But you do not get the actual separation you get with VRF-Lite ie. the traffic simply overrides the existing routing tables.
    The other thing to bear in mind with PBR is that you also have to configure the return traffic as well so each device would need multiple PBR configs.
    Again i don't know whether the HP supports PBR but it may not be an issue depending on what the routing is on the HP.
    You could also use a combination of the above ie VRF-Lite between the Cisco switches and then PBR for the last hop to the HP device.
    I should say i don't have a huge amount of experience with VRF-Lite but that should not necessarily stop you using it if it is what you need. There are lots of other people on here so i'm sure there will be other people who can help if i can't.
    It still depends on how much separation is required. VRF-Lite is definitely seen as a way to separate traffic running across a shared infrastructure, PBR is not really seen in the same way.  So it may well be worth going back to find out exactly what "segregating" user traffic means.
    I don't want to confuse the issue but it's still not entirely clear what the actual requirement is.
    Jon

  • Private VLan in 3550

    we are going to purchase cisco 3550 switches for our DMZs setup, we would like to utilise the Private VLAN (PVLAN) features in order to protect our individual server from any attack or any compromise servers. Can any body highlight some more on this how best is this to configure pvlans in cisco 3550 switches and is there any issues with Checkpoint Firewall.
    where I will get step by step commands. I searched on cisco site but lost myself for finding the step by step documentation.
    I find one documentation which was very good but it is for cisco 6500 series switches. please see the link for that http://www.cisco.com/warp/customer/473/90.shtml
    Thanks in advance

    Here is a link that I hope helps you with your coinfiguration. See Configuring Protected Ports portion for the PVLAN feature.
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/partner/products/hw/switches/ps637/products_configuration_guide_chapter09186a008007e838.html
    I don't know any issues with specific vendor equipment (e.g. Checkpoint FW, etc).
    Hope this helps you,
    Don

  • Heads Up: Private VLAN Sticky-ARP DHCP Issues

    Here is the scenario:
    Private VLANs are configured on a 6500 Sup720 with SVIs routing for the PVLANs.
    DHCP Snooping and IP ARP Inspection are also configured for the PVLAN subnets.
    A DHCP Server is offering 3 day leases.
    A laptop connects to the network and receives a 3-day lease. The user leaves the office and returns 4 days later. The DHCP server offers a new lease with a different IP address. Furthermore, the previous IP address leased to the laptop has been handed out in a new lease to another host. Both systems receive their DHCP lease but have no network connectivity.
    The problem occurs because, by default, PVLAN SVIs use Sticky-ARP and never age out their ARP cache. Since the laptop has a different IP address to MAC address mapping than recorded in the Sticky-ARP cache, a violation occurs and the switch prevents the new IP address from populating the ARP table on the switch.
    Sticky-ARP is a security feature that prevents one system from stealing another systems IP address.
    Log messages show the following:
    %IP-3-STCKYARPOVR: Attempt to overwrite Sticky ARP entry
    The 6500 PVLAN configuration guide Restrictions and Guidlines section suggests that Sticky-ARP is fundamental to Private-VLANs, and the only work-around for this problem is to create manual arp entries for the new IP address. This is clearly not a viable workaround for this scenario.
    http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/cat6000/122sx/swcg/pvlans.htm#wp1090979
    However, the 6500 Command Reference shows that Sticky ARP can be disabled, but makes no reference to PVLANs
    http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/cat6000/122sx/cmdref/i1.htm#wp1091738
    There appears to be two sensible solutions to this problem:
    1) Disable Stick-ARP on the 6500 for the PVLANs. Since DHCP Snooping and IP ARP Inspection are configured, sticky-arp can be disabled without relaxing network security. This is assuming the 6500 will accept the command and will not break the existing PVLAN functionality.
    2) Extend the DHCP lease longer, to 45 or 90 days perhaps. This will catch most transient activity and keep the IP address to MAC address relationships the same, wherever possible. The downside here is that DHCP address pools could collect stale entires that would take the lease time to flush, thus reducing the overall available IPs in the pool.
    Has anyone else run into this problem? If so, what was your solution? Did you attempt either option above? I am planning on using solution #1 above, but I wanted to ping the NetPro community with this as I am sure we are not the first customer to run into this. Or are we??
    Regards,
    Brad

    Excellent question.
    Sticky-ARP is NOT intended to be a pain-in-the-butt that should disabled right away, rather, it is a security mechanism that prevents a system from stealing an active IP address on the subnet and causing a lot of problems. Sticky-ARP works best on subnets that have all static IP addressing where there is no expectation that a host would frequently change its IP address.
    Yes, I would recommend keeping Sticky-ARP on subnets with all static IP addresses.
    In DHCP subnets with no static IP addressing, DHCP Snooping and IP ARP Inspection provide the same security coverage that Sticky-ARP does, they prevent a system from claiming an illegitimate IP and MAC address. Furthermore, in DHCP subnets, it is reasonable to expect that a host would change its IP address from time to time when its lease expires.
    Sticky-ARP does not provide any addtional securtity benefits when DHCP Snooping and IP ARP Inspection are active and it only causes problems when a lease expires.
    When Cisco made Stick-ARP the default behavior for Private VLANs, they certain did not have DHCP in mind.
    In Summary, it should be known as a Best Practice that when using Private VLANs on user segments with DHCP that DHCP Snooping and IP ARP Inspection should be enabled and Sticky-ARP be disabled.
    Brad

  • Private VLAN

    Hi,
    I am creating Private VLAN on my 7606 Router on SVI interface.
    7606#sh vlan private-vlan
    Primary Secondary Type              Ports
    200     201       isolated          Fa4/13
    7606#sh run int f4/13
    Building configuration...
    Current configuration : 222 bytes
    interface FastEthernet4/13
     switchport private-vlan host-association 200 201
     switchport mode private-vlan host
     no ip address
     no cdp enable
    end
    when i connect a pc with Fa4/13 it remain "FastEthernet4/13 is down, line protocol is down (notconnect)". SVI interface is also down.
    STP-7606#sh int vlan 200
    Vlan200 is down, line protocol is down
      Hardware is EtherSVI, address is 0023.0419.1f40 (bia 0023.0419.1f40)
    Any idea?

    Hello
    here is the good link to understand the PVLAN
    http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/473/90.shtml
    regards
    Dhaval Tandel

  • Private VLAN support on actual HW

                       Hi all,
    I'm currently thinking about a private Vlan based solution for a special demand.
    Now for my initial investigation i need tio have something like a Pvlan HW support matrix.
    Means I'd like to know which switches in cisco portfolio supporting PVLAN's.
    Additional I'm wondering cause most of the PVLAN documentation relative old.
    How about PVLAN support. Is Pvlan on Access switches still (and in future) featured by Cisco?
    thanks for your comments
    Dieter

    Hi Dieter,
    You could see this detail using Cisco Feature Navigator tool which is avilable on the cisco web site.
    1. Go to below site
    http://tools.cisco.com/ITDIT/CFN/jsp/index.jsp
    2. Select the Feature button and type the Feature which you would like verify. If you press continue button, you can supported code as well as platform
    If you would like to know about any specific product support detail, please inform me, i can share information whether it supports or not.
    Inform me if you need more detail.
    Regards,
    Aru

  • Private Vlan and Switchport Protected

    Dear All,
    My core switch is 4500 which support Private Vlan. However, I have several closet switch (2950) which only support Switchport Protected. 4500 and each 2950 are connected with trunk using fiber.
    How can I config PC at 2950_Switch1 cannot communicate to PC at 2950_Switch2 (all fastethernet port on both 2950 are at the same vlan and same subnet)?
    Thanks.
    C.K.

    Hi C.k.,
    I believe you can use switchport protected feature along with port blocking feature to accomplish this. First have your switch ports configured as protected ports on which you dont want the traffic to flow and then configure those ports to deny unknown unicast and multicast using the " port-blocking feature ".
    Try that and let us know.
    http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/cat2950/12120ea2/2950scg/swtrafc.htm#wp1174968
    HTH,
    -amit singh

  • Switches 2950 with private-vlan

    Hi experts!
    Do you know if switches 2950 suport private-vlan? I upgrade IOS and try to configure PVLAN, but this switch model dont have the interface mode command "switchport private-vlan".
    best regards,
    Rodrigo A.

    See the below matix:-
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/switches/ps708/products_tech_note09186a0080094830.shtml
    HTH>

  • Private VLANs - is this configuration right?

    Hi
    I have a 4500 that has a vlan (10) on it that none of the clients should talk to each other. I am going to configure this as a isolated vlan. This VLAN is propagated to a 6500 that has the IP address of this VLAN, from what I have read I need to create a primary vlan (99) and then create the client vlan (10) as a isolated vlan within this (99).
    Is this correct?
    If anyone has a good doc on PVLANs please let me know! The docs on Cisco seem to be lacking.
    Cheers

    Here is an example.. Vlan 83 is the promiscuous VLAN, I left in a port on vlan 230 that has a host on it.
    no file verify auto
    spanning-tree mode pvst
    spanning-tree extend system-id
    spanning-tree vlan 83,100-101,210,230,248-250 priority 24576
    vlan internal allocation policy ascending
    vlan 83
    name DMZ_VLAN
    private-vlan primary
    private-vlan association 100-101,210,230,248
    vlan 100
    name hinfwe-vlan
    private-vlan community
    vlan 101
    name hinneo-vlan
    private-vlan community
    vlan 210
    name IPASS
    private-vlan community
    vlan 230
    name DNS-GSS
    private-vlan community
    vlan 248
    name ADP-Internal
    private-vlan community
    interface GigabitEthernet1/0/1
    description GSS-01 83.200
    switchport private-vlan host-association 83 230
    switchport mode private-vlan host
    no logging event link-status
    speed 100
    duplex full
    no snmp trap link-status
    spanning-tree portfast
    spanning-tree guard root
    interface GigabitEthernet1/0/24
    description Firewall_Uplink
    switchport access vlan 83
    switchport private-vlan mapping 83 100-101,210,230,248-250
    switchport mode private-vlan promiscuous
    speed 1000
    duplex full
    spanning-tree portfast
    spanning-tree guard root
    HTH
    CHris

  • Private vlans

    Hi I'm trying to configure some private vlans on a cat 3550, I cant really find any good configuration example
    can anyone provide me with a Config example
    cheers
    per

    PVLAN capabilities on 3550 are very limited. 3550 does not support Community and Isolated VLANs but only Protected ports. The following pages should help
    http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/473/63.html#topic1
    http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/c3550/12225see/scg/swtrafc.htm#wp1158863
    PS: Remember to rate useful posts.

  • ISE to dynamiclly push Private Vlans on Access switch deployments

                       Hi all,
    is there a way to push PVLAN configuration via ISE to Access switches.
    Currently I'm thinking about an authoration profile with an attribute setting PVLAN.
    Has anyone an idea how to push Private VLan configs dynamiclly to Access Ports on Switches.
    Thanks for your comments

    Try looking into using switch macros, you should be able to create a custom macro that changes the config of the port in question to make it part of a pvlan community/isolated port or whatever you need and then trigger this macro from ISE with your authorization result. It's used for the feature cisco call NEAT, try searching for that and you should find some examples.

  • SF 300 private-vlan

    Hi,
    I am working on a SF 300 . I favor the cli over the web-interface.
    I will like to make a private-vlan community but do not know if my sequence of commands are right or allowed.
    Can someone point me in the right direction please ?
    MedSwitch#configure terminal
    MedSwitch(config)#vlan da
    MedSwitch(config-vlan)#vlan 50
    MedSwitch(config-vlan)#private-lan community
    % Unrecognized command
    This is my first experience with cisco switches. I am a beginner.
    Thanks.
    -Luis

    Hi Luis, this switch does not support private vlan. You may use protected port features (PVE, private vlan edge). This concept means if there is a port with protected port toggle, any other protected port cannot communicate amongst themselves. This behaves sort of like an "isolated port". However, any port that is not a protected port may communicate to the protected port which operates similar to a "promiscuous port".
    If you need vlan separation it will be accomplished through ACL or routing functions.
    -Tom
    Please mark answered for helpful posts

  • Private Vlan support on CAT3850

    Hello , i need to configure private vlans on Catalyst 3850 .
    On this page is said that 3850 does support this technology
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/switches/ps5718/ps12686/qa_c67-722110.html
    But i can't  configure it because there is no such commands in CLI
    3850(config-vlan)#pri?
    % Unrecognized command
    Does it support it or will it support private vlans in future?

    Dmitry
    There does seem to be conflicting information. The link you provide does say they are supported but looking at the config guide it says -
    Restrictions for VLANs
    The following are restrictions for VLANs:
    The switch supports per-VLAN spanning-tree plus (PVST+) or rapid PVST+ with a maximum of 128 spanning-tree instances. One spanning-tree instance is allowed per VLAN.
    The switch supports IEEE 802.1Q trunking methods for sending VLAN traffic over Ethernet ports.
    Configuring an interface VLAN router's MAC address is not supported. The interface VLAN already has an MAC address assigned by default.
    Private VLANs are not supported on the switch.
    You cannot have a switch stack containing a mix of Catalyst 3850 and Catalyst 3650 switches.
    full link -
    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3850/software/release/3se/vlan/configuration_guide/b_vlan_3se_3850_cg_chapter_0100.html
    So it looks like with this release at least, they are not available. I don't know whether they are scheduled to be included in a later release of the software.
    Perhaps someone from Cisco can comment. The product page certainly needs updating as it seems the configuration guide is the correct one.
    Edit - i have posted a link to this thread in the Technical Documentation forum to ask for clarification although a Cisco person is still not guaranteed to answer.
    Jon

  • Private-VLAN trunk on 3560X

    Hi,
    I need to create Private-VLANs on 3650X, but is possible to configure this technology with 3560X switch and IOS 12.2(55)SE5?. I attach the topology.
    I want to configure the private VLANs on the VLAN 30, the isolated VLAN is the number 100 and the community VLAN is the 200. I guess that the interfaces trunk has to be set as promiscuous mode, is that correct?
    If the trunk is configuring as promiscuous mode, what happened with the others VLANs (10, 20 and 40), and what is the correct configuration for the interfaces trunk?

    Hi,
    Follow the config guide on how to configure private vlans:
    http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3750x_3560x/software/release/12-2_53_se/configuration/guide/3750xscg/swpvlan.html
    HTH

Maybe you are looking for