Trunking on older 3500XL switches
I probably already know the answer to this but is there a way to remove vlans 1 and 1002-1005 on a trunk port on a 3548-XL? I want to be able to connect an IP phone to the port and only allow traffic from my voice and the floor vlans (599 & 730) respectively. But when I run the command:
switchport trunk allowed vlan remove 1-598,600-729,731-1024
all the vlans are removed exept 1,599,730,1002-1005. I know that these are "special" vlans and these are older switches, but is there a way to remove them from a port on these switches?
If you want to configure the port for just voice vlan and data vlan then you need not to clear vlans out of the trunk, just configure voice vlan. This platform should support voice vlan. for example:
interface FastEthernet0/2
description DOT1Q port to IP Phone
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport trunk native vlan 730
switchport mode trunk
switchport voice vlan 599
spanning-tree portfast
For more information:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk1077/technologies_configuration_example09186a00800ffdcc.shtml#vlanscat3500
From 3500XL port configurations guide:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/c2900xl/29_35wc6/scg/swports.htm#xtocid32
Please rate helpful posts.
Similar Messages
-
Can I use straight cable to connect trunk ports between 2 switches?
Hi,
Am I able to use straight instead of cross cable to connect trunk ports between 2 switches??
thanks!Hi Devang,
When a 10/100 Fast Ethernet interface is enabled, one end of the link must perform media dependent interface (MDI) crossover (MDIX), so that the transmitter on one end of the data link is connected to the receiver on the other end of the data link (a crossover cable is typically used).
The Auto-MDIX feature eliminates the need for crossover cabling by performing an internal crossover when a straight cable is detected during the auto-negotiation phase.
HTH, if yes please rate the post.
Ankur -
802.1q trunk b/w 8PoE switch integrated in 1861 CME
Hi,
I have to deploy cme7.0 (1861). Actually two 1861 routers are bought but only one of them act as cme while the 8PoE integrated switch of other 1861 is used. half of the IP phones are connected to the 8PoE integrated switch in CME (1861 router) while half of the phones are connected to 8PoE of 1861 (only 1861's PoE is used in this setup). i want to know whether i can cascade the two switches or in other words whether i can form a 802.1q trunk b/w these switches to carry the voice and data vlans.
Regards
Naresh RathoreYes, you can.
-
Switchport trunk encapsulation on L3 switches
Why is 'switchport trunk encapsulation <dot1q or isl> required on L3 switches? The default trunk encapsuation mode on 'modern' Cisco switches is to 'auto' negotiate, so why doesn't 'auto-negotiate' work when configured from the L3 switch port? If I configure 'switchport mode trunk' on an L2 switch (capable of only dot1q) and don't configure the adjacent L3 port, the trunk is auto-negotiated. However, if I configure 'switchport mode trunk' on the L3 port first, it gives the error we've all witnessed: Command rejected: An interface whose trunk encapsulation is "Auto" can not be configured to "trunk" mode. Interestingly, if I configure, 'switchport mode dynamic desirable' on the L3 port, the interface does indeed negotiate the trunk encapsulation and establish the trunk. According to Cisco documentation, the 'switchport mode trunk' command is also supposed to negotiate the trunking status and encapsulation--so why doesn't this command work the same as 'switchport mode dynamic desirable?'
John,
You're absolutely correct. My hope is that Cisco will change its definition for 'switchport mode trunk.'
This is from their documentation:
switchport mode dynamic desirable
Makes the interface actively attempt to convert the link to a trunk link. The interface becomes a trunk interface if the neighboring interface is set to trunk, desirable, or auto mode.
switchport mode trunk
Puts the interface into permanent trunking mode and negotiates to convert the neighboring link into a trunk link. The interface becomes a trunk interface even if the neighboring interface is not a trunk interface.
switchport nonegotiate
Prevents the interface from generating DTP frames. You can use this command only when the interface switchport mode is access or trunk. You must manually configure the neighboring interface as a trunk interface to establish a trunk link.
I've highlighted negotiates to point out that DTP frames are still sent to the neighboring device to negotiate the trunking status. Therefore, why doesn't it also negotiate the encapsulation type when desiring to trunk? My point being, if it's going to trunk unconditionally and not negotiate the trunking protocol, and since you'd have to have an ISL-only switch (non-extant), Cisco should simply get rid of ISL on their switches or have the 'negotiation' process or (unconditional state) select dot1Q as the trunking protocol. -
Trunk Confiugration on ME4900 Switch
Hello Technical Team,
We have 2 Cisco ME4900 Switch with 3 Modules inside: Below are the detail for the Module:
Mod Ports Card Type Model Serial No.
---+-----+--------------------------------------+------------------+-----------
1 8 4900M 10GE (X2) WS-C4900M
2 24 10GE (X2), 1000BaseX (SFP) WS-X4908-10GE
3 20 10/100/1000BaseT (RJ45) WS-X4920-GB-RJ45
I am trying to build trunk between these 2 Switches by using 10GE(X2) 1000Base X (SFP) Ports but unfortunately I am fail to do that. Is there any specific Command to make trunk or port channel between 2 ME-4900 Switch?
Thanks,
JHHi RS,
I have below Modules:
1 8 4900M 10GE (X2) WS-C4900M
2 24 10GE (X2), 1000BaseX (SFP) WS-X4908-10GE
3 20 10/100/1000BaseT (RJ45) WS-X4920-GB-RJ45
If I do show run then I have follow Ports order:
1 8 4900M 10GE (X2) WS-C4900M
interface TenGigabitEthernet1/1 TO TenGigabitEthernet1/8
2 24 10GE (X2), 1000BaseX (SFP) WS-X4908-10GE
interface TenGigabitEthernet2/1 TO interface TenGigabitEthernet2/8
interface GigabitEthernet2/9 TO interface GigabitEthernet2/24
3 20 10/100/1000BaseT (RJ45) WS-X4920-GB-RJ45
interface GigabitEthernet3/1 TO interface GigabitEthernet3/20
So i am going to use SFP base X2 Convertor for Trunk between another ME-4900 Switch so do do I use 2/9-10 ports from 1st 2 SFP Ports from GBIC?
Further what is the command to check the port group ?
Kindly see the SH running for your advice.
Thanks,
JH -
Etherchannel trunk with two cisco switch
Hi, my company using only one Cisco 3750 switch with VLAN1,2,3,4,5.
Now my company bought another cisco switch and we would like to etherchannel trunk between both and create new VLAN in new switch. We look over from partner, some of them suggested we use LACP, and some of them suggest we use PAgP. We are so confuse which will be better in our environment.
Previous: Router <> 3750 switch A (VLAN 1,2,3,4,5)
Now we bought another Cisco Switch B: Router <>3750 switch A <> switch B (add more VLAN 6,7,8,9,10)
Which of below command is the best choice to suit our company ? suppose we use 2 port of gigabitethernet 1/0/1 and 1/0/2 trunk? All VLAN 1-10 need to communicate with each other.
interface GigabitEthernet1/0/1
channel-group 1 mode active <<< (use "active" or "desirable" is the best choice)
switchport mode trunk
interface GigabitEthernet1/0/2
channel-group 1 mode active
switchport mode trunk
interface Port-channel 1
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q << (do we need put this? as we think this is by default after trunk?)
switchport mode trunk
switchport nonegotiate <<< (do we need "nonegotiate" if both switch setup same configure?)Hello
My understanding is pagp and lacp basically perform the same features - however as PAGP is cisco propriety LACP is IEEE standard which can be used between different route/switch vendor platforms.
As for disabling DTP ( switchport nonegotiate) - i would agree to do this suggestion, As so not to have trunks being dynamically created.
Lastly i would manually prune unused vlans across trunk interfaces, to save on cpu and memory usage because of the stp instances that coild be used ( however such a small vlan database like yours would not be an issue)
So to summarise:
Cisco to Cisco ehterchannels =PAGP
Cisco to other vendors = LACP
L2 etherchannel
================
1) default physical interfaces (if possible)
2) configure port-channel in physical interfaces
-- port-channel will be created automatically
3)create trunking encapsulation or access port mode directly in port-channel interface
4)enable physical interfaces "no shut"
conf t
default int ran fa0/1 -3 ( if applicable)
int ran fa0/1 -3
shut ( if applicable)
channel-group 1 mode xxx
int port-channel 1
switchport trunk encap dot1q
switchport- mode trunk
switchport nonegotiate
switchport trunk allowed vlan 1-10
res
Paul -
Trunk mode in SLM224P switches
Hello, can someone please tell me how to create trunk in SLM224P switches ?
As it is possible, I think I should do it that way:
create the same vlans (all vlans) on both switches
set ports whitch sw1 and sw2 are connected as tagged
rest of ports untagged ?
2 switchers are connected by ports which have the same vlan sw1 connected to bgp router, sw2 stands alone.
This does not working, any ideas ??
Best regards and sorry for my english
Message Edited by ringos on 10-24-2009 04:32 AM
Message Edited by ringos on 10-24-2009 04:36 AMI suggest configuring both switches with VLANs, member ports to a specific VLAN and connect PC's set with static IP addresses on switch 1 and 2. In this way, you can see if both switches will work when PC's connected to same VLAN on switch 1 and 2 communicate by PING.
Hope this helps! -
802.1q trunking with 3rd party switch
I'm setting up a project that requires a cisco router, which is capable of doing 802.1q trunking. This is the only function I need to test with a 3rd party switch. What is the cheapest router that I can use to accomplish this.
Hi,
This should be the one:
http://cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps380/ps6942/product_data_sheet0900aecd804b1b19.html
Please rate if this helped.
Regards,
Daniel -
Bandwidth command in 3500Xl switches
Hi,
I have seen a bandwidth command in the interface config mode. When I apply it, it does not limit the traffic.
I have to limit a traffic on a perticular port to which a PC is connected.
THanx
sagarHi,
thanx for ur reply. I tried for policing the traffic.
I created a class-map, then applied that class to the policy map. But when I try to apply the policy to the interface, there is no effect of the command nor does the applied command shows up in the show run.
The config is as given below:-
class-map limit
match access-group 2
policy-map rate
class limit
bandwidth 100
access-list 2 permit 10.3.22.204
Switch(config)#int f0/15
Switch(config-if)#service-policy input rate
The last command is not reflected in the sh run
sagar -
Currently we have two separate LAN infrastructures each using only VLAN 1. Each LAN has a unique IP address subnet.
This is a campus environment. There is now a need to connect a small building on the campus that will have a few devices on one LAN and a few other devices on the other LAN. The company doesn't want to buy 2 switches. We have a 3524 switch with two fiber connections and we have enough fiber pairs so that we can use one fiber connection for each LAN. Each of the fiber connections would terminate into another 3500 switch in each LAN.
Is there a way I can define two VLANs on the switch in the small building, yet have the traffic for each LAN go over it's own fiber link to the appropriate LAN and be handed off as being part of VLAN 1 so that I don't have to define a new VLAN on a number of existing switches? Could the feature to configure the native VLAN for untagged traffic be used?Hello,
if you cannot create a new VLAN and need to use the existing VLAN 1 from both locations, there would be a (rather tedious) approach to this: add static MAC address entries on the switches connecting to your 3524. Let's say you have the following setup, including the 3524 switch:
Lan1(3500_1) --> Fiber Link --> 3524 --> Fiber Link --> Lan2 (3500_2)
On switch 3500_1, you would add static MAC entries for the devices from Lan2 like this:
mac-address-table static 0020.1223.e3f4 interface GigabitEthernet0/2
Interface GigabitEthernet0/2 would be an unused interface, and by statically directing the MAC addresses from the other VLAN to that unused port, you effectively deny access for these MAC addresses. Do the same for the MAC addresses from Lan1 on switch 3500_2.
I am not sure if this is going to work as desired, but you might want to give it a try...
Regards,
GP -
WHATS WRONG WITH THE BELOW CONFIG
FINDINGS;
-WHEN PHONE IS PLUGGED TO INT F0/13, IT WAS ABLE TO REGISTER TO THE CME ON THE VG.
-SOME PORTS ON F0/1-12 WORKS FOR PHONES AND SOME JUST DONT
COMMON CONFIG OF PORTS FO/1-12
interface FastEthernet0/1
description PHONE_PC
switchport access vlan 101
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport mode access
switchport voice vlan 601
srr-queue bandwidth share 10 10 60 20
srr-queue bandwidth shape 10 0 0 0
mls qos trust device cisco-phone
mls qos trust cos
auto qos voip cisco-phone
spanning-tree portfast
CONNECTION TO THE VOICE ROUTER
interface FastEthernet0/24
description VOICE_GATEWAY
switchport access vlan 601
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
switchport mode access
switchport voice vlan 601
spanning-tree portfast
DEDICATED USER DATA VLAN
interface FastEthernet0/13
switchport access vlan 101
switchport mode access
INT VLAN 101
IP ADDRESS 10.101.1.1 255.255.255.1
INT VLAN 601
NO IP ADDRESS
interface FastEthernet0/24 IS CONNECTED TO THE VOICE ROUTER HAVING THE VG IP ADDRESS OF 10.61.1.1Hi Celso,
Hope all is well with you :)
I would try removing this line from the Ports that connect to IP Phones;
switchport trunk encapsulation dot1q
It is unnecessary to configure the switchport in Trunk mode because when you use the Voice VLAN (with a native vlan) command a "special" dot1q trunk is automatically setup. The reasons I have seen to support this setup are many and vary from minimizing Trunking overhead to ease of configuration and everything in between :) On the older 3500XL Switches the Trunk method was the only way to go, but on all newer versions the need for Sitchport mode Trunk is not necessary. Here is one of the better threads I have ever read on this issue (with some Tac links as well). There are some great answers from Mahesh,Paolo Sankar and others here.
http://forum.cisco.com/eforum/servlet/NetProf?page=netprof&forum=Unified%20Communications%20and%20Video&topic=IP%20Telephony&CommCmd=MB%3Fcmd%3Dpass_through%26location%3Doutline%40%5E1%40%40.1ddd5905/14#selected_message
This good link was kindly provided by Jaime;
How to configure a Catalyst switch port to connect to a Cisco IP phone
http://www.ciscotaccc.com/kaidara-advisor/lanswitching/showcase?case=K33524366
Hope this helps!
Rob -
Multiple interface switch commands
I have seen it done a few times where multiple switch ports are set with the same parameters with one command. Can someone help me find a document that will describe setting multiple switch port interfaces with the same command, ie. switchport mode access for interfaces 2 - 22 or switchport access vlan 2 for interfaces 5 - 10. Now, here is the biggy, I would like to do this on my older 3500XL switches and my newer 3550 & 3560 switches.
Hi,
Please take a look at this document explaining the 'interface range' command.
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps1834/products_feature_guide09186a00800803ff.html
Regards. -
We have a flat network of 6 3750g poe switches in a stack. default vlan1 for data.......we are getting ready to go to voip and am need some general guidance in setting up voice vlan. It seems some say the ports should be in trunk mode, others say no. Just looking for simple config examples for the setup. thank you
Hi Mark,
Welcome to the world of VoIP. This is a great question!My background is primarily voice so it is hard for me to describe why this is a Cisco "best practice". I do know that it is unnecessary to configure the switchport in Trunk mode because when you use the Voice VLAN (with a native vlan) command a "special" dot1q trunk is automatically setup. The reasons I have seen to support this setup are many and vary from minimizing Trunking overhead to ease of configuration and everything in between :) On the older 3500XL Switches the Trunk method was the only way to go, but on all newer versions the need for Sitchport mode Trunk is not necessary. Here is one of the better threads I have ever read on this issue (with some Tac links as well). There are some great answers from Mahesh,Paolo Sankar and others here.
http://forum.cisco.com/eforum/servlet/NetProf?page=netprof&forum=Unified%20Communications%20and%20Video&topic=IP%20Telephony&CommCmd=MB%3Fcmd%3Dpass_through%26location%3Doutline%40%5E1%40%40.1ddd5905/14#selected_message
Hope this helps!
Rob -
How to check trunk port on 3548 xl switch
Hi all,
i have 3548 xl switch i know on other switches i can use command
sh int trunk but on this switch it does not work.
do anyone knows which command we can use to check trunk ports other then this
sh int fa switchport???????????
thanks
maheshHi all,
i have 3548 xl switch i know on other switches i can use command
sh int trunk but on this switch it does not work.
do anyone knows which command we can use to check trunk ports other then this
sh int fa switchport???????????
thanks
mahesh
Hi Mahesh,
What error it shows when you issue show interface trunk on switches ..
Ganesh.H -
Switch trunk native and switchport trunk allowed commands
Hello,
What will be the result of having these two commands defined on trunk
Switch(Config-if)# switchport trunk native vlan 500
Switch(Config-if)# switchport trunk allowed vlan remove 500
ThanksThe first command would send traffic untagged over vlan 500, but the second command removes vlan 500 from the trunk, so I think you would lose traffic for anything using vlan 500....
HTH,
John
*** Please rate all useful posts ***
Maybe you are looking for
-
Logic crashing every time I open it!
Argh. So, I went to the beach today. Shut down my computer before leaving. Did some recording in the AM, everything was fine. I get home. Spin up the old studio. But wait, what's this? One of my Firewire Drives isn't mounting? Hmmm. I open up disk pr
-
A PDF is used as a n image link which has Spot PMS 186 and 115 in it. When viewing colors in "separation" view the spot colors do not appear. They view as CMYK when shutting off individually. I also tried typing and changing font color to 186 but
-
The application is bingo blitz on facebook when i log into my nieces user account it works the game perfect but then when i switch users and go on mine it loads in the game but i am unable to play it. I dont know if its to do with needing to change s
-
Pre configured oracle VM that have dg pre configured
Hi i am looking for pre configured oracle VM that have dg pre configured does oracle has this vm for playing with data gurad dgmgrl Thanks
-
Is there any way to re-install an older version of pages on my computer? The new version lost a lot of the templates I enjoyed using...