[66791] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Any 1U - 2U Ethernet switches that can handle 4K VLANs?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (ken emery)
Sun Jan 25 20:19:04 2004
Date: Sun, 25 Jan 2004 17:18:30 -0800 (PST)
From: ken emery <ken@cnet.com>
To: nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0401251751450.22781-100000@obsidian.silicon-dragon.net>
Errors-To: owner-nanog-outgoing@merit.edu
On Sun, 25 Jan 2004, Bill Nash wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Jan 2004, ken emery wrote:
> > > The point of using VLANs is that you don't need to route. There's
> > > probably a good reason for switching instead of routing in the original
> > > poster's scenario. (Perhaps a FTTH-like project?)
> >
> > Correct me if I'm wrong here, but at some point you will have to route
> > all those VLAN's. To really answer the question about wether > 1000
> > VLAN's are necessary one would need to see the network design.
> I would argue this point. I've got a production environment sporting
> multiple vlans, none which will ever see an external subnet or even a
> gateway (think databases.) The operative context inherent in the VLAN
> acronym is, after all, 'local', and not every topology requires routing.
This is correct, but then why spend the money on a L3 switch? Routing
isn't needed so save the money and purchase a L2 switch.
bye,
ken emery
