[AusNOG] dot1q-tunnel and cisco nexus 5000s

[McDonald Richards]

MPLS is not that difficult to implement -  and once you have, it's about 3
lines of configuration to build an ethernet pseudowire on most devices but
this only works well in point to point scenarios.

VPLS can work if you aren't flood too many MACs and you don't want your
VPLS PE devices to actually read/interpret/manipulate the tags (lots of
feature gap).

If you are doing basic tag stacking in a local area that you have complete
control of and your device does not support q-in-q, you can do the good
ghetto way and just loop a cable from a trunk/tagged port into an
access/untagged port (access port will add a second layer of tags inside
that VLAN if it transmits out a trunk port).

Macca



On 21/03/13 5:19 PM, "Sean K. Finn" <sean.finn at ozservers.com.au> wrote:

>I, too, am interested in hearing *anyones* opinions of dragging tagged
>vlan traffic across a network like this without the use of QinQ.
>
>Has anyone had experiencing using other protocols, for example, Ethernet
>over IP, or VPLS or any other of the billion protocol abstractions to
>achieve something like this?
>
>Does anyone have any *theories* of how to drag VLAN traffic tagged across
>a non QinQ aware switch setup, for example, over layer 3 perhaps?
>
>All thoughts welcome.
>
>S.
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net
>[mailto:ausnog-bounces at lists.ausnog.net] On Behalf Of David Gwynne
>Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 3:02 PM
>To: Peter Tiggerdine
>Cc: ausnog at lists.ausnog.net
>Subject: Re: [AusNOG] dot1q-tunnel and cisco nexus 5000s
>
>On 21/03/2013, at 2:54 PM, Peter Tiggerdine <ptiggerdine at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Because it's a data centre switch not a services aggregation switch
>>with the primary purpose of unified fabric.
>
>thats a very arbitrary distinction to me.
>
>> What's the use case for q-in-q in datacentres?
>
>we wanted to support the provisioning of private networks between groups
>of virtual machines, all hosted in the same DC. it would have been nice
>to simply configure the vlan tags on the hypervisors and let them get
>tunnelled over the single vlan all the hypervisors are plugged together
>with on the 5ks. without q-in-q we need to put the vlans on the switches,
>which is annoying where we are cos we can't arbitrarily allocate tags.
>
>dlg
>
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 2:46 PM, David Gwynne <loki at animata.net> wrote:
>> does anyone know why q-in-q isnt available on nexus 5000 kit?
>> 
>> dlg
>> _______________________________________________
>> AusNOG mailing list
>> AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>> http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>> 
>
>_______________________________________________
>AusNOG mailing list
>AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog
>_______________________________________________
>AusNOG mailing list
>AusNOG at lists.ausnog.net
>http://lists.ausnog.net/mailman/listinfo/ausnog