[rbridge] Preview of changes for VLANs, etc.

[Russ White]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


> RBridges, on the other hand, like bridges, are simultaneously supporting
> multiple VLANs
> over the same port. VLANs that the RBridge itself is not a member of in
> any sense -- just
> that the RBridge is supposed to support to glue it to other pieces of
> the VLAN in other
> parts of the campus.

Again, the only two instances I know of are:

1. There are subinterfaces, or physical interfaces, which belong to a
single vlan.

2. The port is declared a trunk, and specific rules apply to the port,
such as no end user traffic is allowed on the port.

And I still don't see what any of this has to do with all this
complexity. I've described all the situations in previous emails, and
how to handle them, without the concept of a "common vlan," etc. Again,
why do we need this complexity? What is it supporting? Can someone point
to a specific situation that wouldn't be handled by the forwarding rules
I proposed earlier--that's not contrived, and impossible with all
current implementations?

:-)

Russ

- --
riw at cisco.com CCIE <>< Grace Alone

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFHMQtxER27sUhU9OQRAoeAAKDx4z6UoUgHVEWSMibQ7Z/sOfknDgCg1+YI
HDaYykz4jypmQnjo9P5KNcU=
=yDY4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----