[119291] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Layer 2 vs. Layer 3 to TOR
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Brandon Ewing)
Thu Nov 12 15:39:43 2009
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:39:01 -0600
From: Brandon Ewing <nicotine@warningg.com>
To: Seth Mattinen <sethm@rollernet.us>
Mail-Followup-To: Seth Mattinen <sethm@rollernet.us>,
"'nanog@nanog.org'" <nanog@nanog.org>
In-Reply-To: <4AFC6DD8.5050502@rollernet.us>
Cc: "'nanog@nanog.org'" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:19:36PM -0800, Seth Mattinen wrote:
>=20
> I'd always wondered how you make a subnet available across racks with L3
> rack switching. It seems that you don't.
>=20
> ~Seth
It's possible, with prior planning. You can have the uplinks be layer 2
trunks, with a layer 3 SVI in the trunk acting as your actual routed uplink.
Requires much planning in advance regarding what vlans are trunked where,
etc. Allows one to do layer 3 termination at top of rack for single
servers, but offer vlans that span multiple layer 3 switches with HSRP at
distribution as an option for systems/services that require a common
broadcast domain.
--=20
Brandon Ewing (nicotine@warningg.com)
--2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFK/HJl7UrjtO3ToYoRAgVRAJ0RjX2d3y9HMWQ5DjKUVIDW/iAAzQCbBWwN
yhWRENGQoj7CXTyyEjAWUz0=
=WbWZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--2oS5YaxWCcQjTEyO--
