Categories

Pushing VLAN tags through unmanaged switches

Posted on Friday, March 21st, 2014 in tcpip by DP

2014-03-13 19.47.41

Kenneth Finnegan writes:

This year, I was designated as the computer network zonie, so it’s my job to make sure that there’s IP connectivity between all the major sites in the network. This involves building a computer network that includes a couple Internet hand-off points, multiple routers, several medium-range (2-5km) microwave links, QoS enforcement for a few hundred devices to support VoIP and streaming video while sharing a 15Mbps Internet uplink, a couple 802.1Q VLAN trunks, etc.
Needless to say, we are building a network beyond the budget we’re being given, so duct tape and Linksys devices are being applied liberally throughout this project.

One problem we’ve encountered this year is that we need a few network devices to be on the same layer two network while being two miles apart. These two sites don’t have line of sight, so we’re using two microwave links to bounce off a third site between them, while these links also need to carry a few other L2 domains. A perfect application for VLAN tagging.

This entry was posted on Friday, March 21st, 2014 at 9:02 pm and is filed under tcpip. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

2 Responses to “Pushing VLAN tags through unmanaged switches”

  1. eLLi says:

    Why is this posted in the “Wireless” category? The concern of the article is VLAN tagging and finding the maximum supported MTU sizes of some 10/100MBit switches and their respective Debian/Linux drivers. That’s just related to general Tcp/Ip networking, with or without wires. Thus, the correct category should be “Tcpip”.

Leave a Reply

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.

Recent Comments

  • Drone: So these go for around $330 USD and NO published calibration procedure online or otherwise? Given what's inside - I don't think I'll be considering...
  • Pekka Akselin: This is ridiculous!? :-) We are back at 256(!) byte EPROMs that needed multiple, a handful, of voltages to run! :-(
  • KH: Let's try a back-of-envelope calc balancing energies. From MCP1700 datasheet, there are graphs for a 200mA load step. Estimate the energy shortfall as 12uJ. Say...
  • Daniel: It's been a week and my comment is still awaiting moderation. Apparently the CIA doesn't want their involvement known?
  • KH: Agree, so okay, I guess he must have learned from somewhere. 100nF and 1000uF is so far apart, that was jarring; it's more magic incantation...