SG500X-24 Trunk Problem

[coxhaus]

I am wondering if any body is running a SG500X-24 switch and is trunking with it? What switch are you trunking to?

I bought a SG500X-24 switch to setup RIPv2 routing protocol in my network at home. For some reason I have the SG500X-24 switch connected by trunk port to a SG200-08 switch. VLAN2 will not work across the trunk port. It works across an access port. My SG300-28 works fine and has been for a couple of years but does not have RIPv2 protocol which I want to use in the future.

 

[sfx2000]

Not sure this is helpful -- but if I recall, one has to define the Trunk VLAN ID explicitly.. and one might also have to define the trunk port/interface and mode (and perhaps the VLAN ID used for the trunk VLAN).

Ran into something similar with a Cisco Nexus5K, when we replaced an old juniper switch. That was a couple of years ago... Juniper was ok with the default as implied, but the Cisco would drop traffic until we defined the trunk explicitly.

 

[coxhaus]

Here is the screen shot from VLAN2 on the SG500X-24 switch. The ports for VLAN2 on both switches are defined as a trunk ports. They are pretty much defined the same for both the SG300-28 and the SG500X-24.

I added the screen shot for VLAN2 on the SG200-08

 

[sfx2000]

Something's bugging me here - and for the moment, I can't really recall - but the trunk VLAN is unique to the trunk, and then we use the user VLAN's - does that ring a bell?

Goes back to what I was saying earlier with newer Cisco stuff having to be explicit - that's part of what tripped us up on the Nexus 5K.

And then of course there's the access/management VLAN to account for as well... which in most cases is default...

 

[coxhaus]

A trunk is a type of Cisco connection between devices.

The access/management VLAN is just a name used for a regular VLAN. It can be the default VLAN or not.

 

[sfx2000]

That's my point - on Nexus management is one VLAN, one is TRUNK, and one is TRAFFIC - this messed up our Cisco experts as well... if you look at non-trunk/non-management traffic on the SG500X, is the traffic being dropped? If so...

What do the online Cisco documents suggest?

 

[coxhaus]

No the traffic is not being dropped on the non-trunk link. I stated the non-trunk traffic is working as stated above.

Cisco documentation will not help as I know how to do this.

 

[coxhaus]

I think you are mixing some of these terms. The VLAN is a container or domain of your devices. Traffic is what is coming from your devices within the VLAN domain. The traffic can be delivered using a trunk or not. It depends on what you are doing. The traffic is the same within the VLAN. The trunk or not is the delivery method of the traffic. So within a trunk there will be multiple VLANs other wise you would not use a trunk.

 

[sfx2000]

I think you're missing Cisco's intent... clear separation between management/trunk/traffic.

But hey, wouldn't be the first time, eh? How many hosts in a /30?

Yep, 2 usable, outside of the broadcast and network IP

ipcalc 68.2.132.144/30
Address:   68.2.132.144         01000100.00000010.10000100.100100 00
Netmask:   255.255.255.252 = 30 11111111.11111111.11111111.111111 00
Wildcard:  0.0.0.3              00000000.00000000.00000000.000000 11
=>

Network:   68.2.132.144/30      01000100.00000010.10000100.100100 00
HostMin:   68.2.132.145         01000100.00000010.10000100.100100 01
HostMax:   68.2.132.146         01000100.00000010.10000100.100100 10
Broadcast: 68.2.132.147         01000100.00000010.10000100.100100 11
Hosts/Net: 2                     Class A

Anyways, was trying to help, but I'm digging into an sendmail issue right now - which we all know how fun that can be...

Best of luck on sorting your issue - remember, TCPDUMP and Wireshark are your friends here - along with the online Cisco stuff - keep in mind, that Cisco did a slight paradigm shift that did cause a bit of confusion...

 

[coxhaus]

Where did I say they were not separate?????????? The reason for VLANs is to separate traffic. You need to go study for a Cisco exam so you can get your terms straight.

You were not helping. I am looking for someone with experience with the SG500X-24 switch. There is a firmware bug with either the SG500X-24 or the SG200-08 switch. It is setup correctly but does not work.

The /30 /31 is a recent change. Go back ten years and point to point is a /30 mask.

 

[sfx2000]

Where did I say they were not separate?????????? The reason for VLANs is to separate traffic. You need to go study for a Cisco exam so you can get your terms straight.

You were not helping. I am looking for someone with experience with the SG500X-24 switch. There is a firmware bug with either the SG500X-24 or the SG200-08 switch. It is setup correctly but does not work.

The /30 /31 is a recent change. Go back ten years and point to point is a /30 mask.

Good luck with your setup - I'm reasonably certain you'll sort it out.

Just remember, as always, Cisco has their own way of doing things - intuitive for a CCNA/CCNE, but counter intuitive for everyone else

technology changes... the challenge for us grey-beards, we have to adapt as well.

All the best - we don't need senior forum members fighting things out - I have a lot of respect for your contributions here.

BTW - the /31 is the odd-duck - was in the specs/RFC's for a long time, but wasn't a big deal until IPV4 started getting really restrained from an address space view... /32 is point to point, /30 used to be treated like that, but it does offer more than just a point to point - which is probably why folks started considering /31.

 

[Xelas]

That's my point - on Nexus management is one VLAN, one is TRUNK, and one is TRAFFIC - this messed up our Cisco experts as well... if you look at non-trunk/non-management traffic on the SG500X, is the traffic being dropped? If so...

What do the online Cisco documents suggest?

I have extensive experience with VLANs with SF/SG-300 series switches, which are almost identical to the 500 series (and much less similar to the 200 series) except that they don't stack.

On SMB switches, Trunks don't have a dedicated VLAN.

Coxhaus,
In addition to defining the ports as trunks, have you confirmed their VLAN memberships and PVID and native VLANs? On Cisco SMB switches, you can pass all your traffic VLANS as tagged (and the switch will silently assign a VLAN of 4096 as the native VLAN for the port), or you can choose a specific VLAN to be the native VLAN, and all other VLANs for that ports as tagged. If there is a missmatch in the way each VLAN is tagged/untagged on both switches for those ports, then the missmatched VLAN will not work on that trunk.