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