|
Posted by Scooby on October 7, 2005, 8:18 am
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
>I think this is OK, but I wanted to run it past a few pros first.
>
> I have an interface that looks like this:
>
> interface GigabitEthernet0/0
> description Cisco 3845
> no ip address
> duplex full
> speed 100
> media-type rj45
> negotiation auto
> !
> interface GigabitEthernet0/0.1
> description HP Management VLAN
> encapsulation dot1Q 1 native
> ip address 10.10.5.1 255.255.255.0
> no snmp trap link-status
> no cdp enable
> !
> interface GigabitEthernet0/0.2
> description Primary Data VLAN
> encapsulation dot1Q 2
> ip address 10.20.5.1 255.255.255.0
> no snmp trap link-status
> no cdp enable
> !
>
> On VLAN 2, I am running out of address on that class C network. I want
> to add another class C to the same VLAN. I assume I can add a secondary
> address to the same VLAN to look like
>
> interface GigabitEthernet0/0.2
> description Primary Data VLAN
> encapsulation dot1Q 2
> ip address 10.20.5.1 255.255.255.0
> ip address 10.21.5.1 255.255.255.0 secondary
> no snmp trap link-status
> no cdp enable
>
> Is this an acceptable method? Or have I crossed to the dark side.
>
> Thanks,
> Chuck
>
Chuck,
Technically, this will work. However, a better means of doing this would be
somthing like:
ip address 10.20.5.1 255.255.254.0
This would give you a supernet of 10.20.4.1-10.20.5.254
You'd have to change the subnet mask on the workstations, but it makes for a
better solution. And, actually, you have 2 more available addresses than
the multiple subnets method.
Hope that helps,
Jim
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML site map