Posible to connect VLAN switch through dumb switch?
Is it possible to connect a VLAN switch into a dumb switch ?
The router will know how to reach network connected by a VLAN through the dumb switch please ?
No edge effect ?
By example, a schema of the project :
Thanks !
switch vlan
asked Nov 12 '18 at 15:49
Puma
312
add a comment |
Is it possible to connect a VLAN switch into a dumb switch ?
The router will know how to reach network connected by a VLAN through the dumb switch please ?
No edge effect ?
By example, a schema of the project :
Thanks !
switch vlan
asked Nov 12 '18 at 15:49
Puma
312
Normally it would not be a problem.
– Cown
Nov 12 '18 at 15:53
1
Possible? Yes. Recommended? No. A "hub" that isn't vlan aware could do anything with tagged traffic. The biggest problem: the frames are now 4 bytes bigger, which can cause them to be dropped as oversized. (1518 vs 1514) In the absolute worst case, your "hub" crashes when presented tagged traffic. (a Cisco 2900XL, for example)
– Ricky Beam
Nov 12 '18 at 19:05
1
Can you reconfigure things so the unmanaged switch is not in that path? Would be a better network design if so.
– Criggie
Nov 12 '18 at 19:43
Did any answer help you? If so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you could post and accept your own answer.
– Ron Maupin♦
Dec 21 '18 at 2:49
add a comment |
Is it possible to connect a VLAN switch into a dumb switch ?
The router will know how to reach network connected by a VLAN through the dumb switch please ?
No edge effect ?
By example, a schema of the project :
Thanks !
switch vlan
asked Nov 12 '18 at 15:49
Puma
312
Is it possible to connect a VLAN switch into a dumb switch ?
The router will know how to reach network connected by a VLAN through the dumb switch please ?
No edge effect ?
By example, a schema of the project :
Thanks !
switch vlan
switch vlan
asked Nov 12 '18 at 15:49
Puma
312
asked Nov 12 '18 at 15:49
Puma
312
edited Nov 12 '18 at 16:12
asked Nov 12 '18 at 15:49
Puma
312
asked Nov 12 '18 at 15:49
Puma
312
asked Nov 12 '18 at 15:49
Puma
312
312
Normally it would not be a problem.
– Cown
Nov 12 '18 at 15:53
1
Possible? Yes. Recommended? No. A "hub" that isn't vlan aware could do anything with tagged traffic. The biggest problem: the frames are now 4 bytes bigger, which can cause them to be dropped as oversized. (1518 vs 1514) In the absolute worst case, your "hub" crashes when presented tagged traffic. (a Cisco 2900XL, for example)
– Ricky Beam
Nov 12 '18 at 19:05
1
Can you reconfigure things so the unmanaged switch is not in that path? Would be a better network design if so.
– Criggie
Nov 12 '18 at 19:43
Did any answer help you? If so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you could post and accept your own answer.
– Ron Maupin♦
Dec 21 '18 at 2:49
add a comment |
Normally it would not be a problem.
– Cown
Nov 12 '18 at 15:53
1
Possible? Yes. Recommended? No. A "hub" that isn't vlan aware could do anything with tagged traffic. The biggest problem: the frames are now 4 bytes bigger, which can cause them to be dropped as oversized. (1518 vs 1514) In the absolute worst case, your "hub" crashes when presented tagged traffic. (a Cisco 2900XL, for example)
– Ricky Beam
Nov 12 '18 at 19:05
1
Can you reconfigure things so the unmanaged switch is not in that path? Would be a better network design if so.
– Criggie
Nov 12 '18 at 19:43
Did any answer help you? If so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you could post and accept your own answer.
– Ron Maupin♦
Dec 21 '18 at 2:49
Normally it would not be a problem.
– Cown
Nov 12 '18 at 15:53
Normally it would not be a problem.
– Cown
Nov 12 '18 at 15:53
1
1
Possible? Yes. Recommended? No. A "hub" that isn't vlan aware could do anything with tagged traffic. The biggest problem: the frames are now 4 bytes bigger, which can cause them to be dropped as oversized. (1518 vs 1514) In the absolute worst case, your "hub" crashes when presented tagged traffic. (a Cisco 2900XL, for example)
– Ricky Beam
Nov 12 '18 at 19:05
Possible? Yes. Recommended? No. A "hub" that isn't vlan aware could do anything with tagged traffic. The biggest problem: the frames are now 4 bytes bigger, which can cause them to be dropped as oversized. (1518 vs 1514) In the absolute worst case, your "hub" crashes when presented tagged traffic. (a Cisco 2900XL, for example)
– Ricky Beam
Nov 12 '18 at 19:05
1
1
Can you reconfigure things so the unmanaged switch is not in that path? Would be a better network design if so.
– Criggie
Nov 12 '18 at 19:43
Can you reconfigure things so the unmanaged switch is not in that path? Would be a better network design if so.
– Criggie
Nov 12 '18 at 19:43
Did any answer help you? If so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you could post and accept your own answer.
– Ron Maupin♦
Dec 21 '18 at 2:49
Did any answer help you? If so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you could post and accept your own answer.
– Ron Maupin♦
Dec 21 '18 at 2:49
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
An unmanaged switch will only have one VLAN. Some unmanaged switches will drop tagged frames as damaged, others will strip the tag, and some will simply pass the frames unchanged. Unless you try it, you have no way to know how your switch acts. For the switches that strip the tags, all the frames will be placed into the native (untagged) VLAN as they pass through the switch.
If your VLAN switch is a layer-3 switch, then you are better off using it as the LAN router and creating a routed link to the router, which can act as the WAN router. You will need to either use static routes on the WAN router, or you will need to run a routing protocol between the WAN router and the layer-3 switch as the LAN router.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:55
Ron Maupin♦
62.4k1262118
Your VLAN doesn't work like mine. Then again, mine won't allow two VLANs to communicate between switches on the same wire.
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:27
@Joshua if that's true, do you really even have vlans? 802.1q, which allows for multiple vlans in the same switch port via tagging, has been a thing for a loooong time now, and it's hard to find a managed switch that won't do this.
– Joel Coehoorn
Nov 12 '18 at 17:28
@JoelCoehoorn: If I can reassign machines to broadcast domains remotely it's a VLAN right?
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:30
add a comment |
Yes, you can do what you're suggesting without any problem.
In practice, the dumb switch treats everything as if it's on vlan1. Technically though, vlan tags are removed when leaving access ports and applied when entering. Vlan tags are only kept in the frame between switches when crossing a trunk port. Since you're not creating a trunk between to the dumb switch (or router), then vlan tagging is not an issue.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:59
aletoledo
3084
The router will have the VLAN 10 declared, any problem with your last sentence ?
– Puma
Nov 12 '18 at 16:03
If you're tagging at the router with a sub-interface, then generally you want to have that go into a trunk port on the switch. Since the dumb switch is incapable of forming a trunk, then it might not work as you expect. If you can get the router and the smart switch to both trunk to the dumb switch, then whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags and you'll be good to go. However this is an unusual design and it's better to just put the trunk straight to a proper layer3 switch.
– aletoledo
Nov 12 '18 at 16:15
5
"whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags" That is not a given. The behavior of an unmanaged switch when faced with VLAN tags is undefined, and some unmanaged switches will drop the frames as damaged and some will strip the tags.
– Ron Maupin♦
Nov 12 '18 at 16:44
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "496"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f54645%2fposible-to-connect-vlan-switch-through-dumb-switch%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
An unmanaged switch will only have one VLAN. Some unmanaged switches will drop tagged frames as damaged, others will strip the tag, and some will simply pass the frames unchanged. Unless you try it, you have no way to know how your switch acts. For the switches that strip the tags, all the frames will be placed into the native (untagged) VLAN as they pass through the switch.
If your VLAN switch is a layer-3 switch, then you are better off using it as the LAN router and creating a routed link to the router, which can act as the WAN router. You will need to either use static routes on the WAN router, or you will need to run a routing protocol between the WAN router and the layer-3 switch as the LAN router.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:55
Ron Maupin♦
62.4k1262118
Your VLAN doesn't work like mine. Then again, mine won't allow two VLANs to communicate between switches on the same wire.
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:27
@Joshua if that's true, do you really even have vlans? 802.1q, which allows for multiple vlans in the same switch port via tagging, has been a thing for a loooong time now, and it's hard to find a managed switch that won't do this.
– Joel Coehoorn
Nov 12 '18 at 17:28
@JoelCoehoorn: If I can reassign machines to broadcast domains remotely it's a VLAN right?
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:30
add a comment |
An unmanaged switch will only have one VLAN. Some unmanaged switches will drop tagged frames as damaged, others will strip the tag, and some will simply pass the frames unchanged. Unless you try it, you have no way to know how your switch acts. For the switches that strip the tags, all the frames will be placed into the native (untagged) VLAN as they pass through the switch.
If your VLAN switch is a layer-3 switch, then you are better off using it as the LAN router and creating a routed link to the router, which can act as the WAN router. You will need to either use static routes on the WAN router, or you will need to run a routing protocol between the WAN router and the layer-3 switch as the LAN router.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:55
Ron Maupin♦
62.4k1262118
Your VLAN doesn't work like mine. Then again, mine won't allow two VLANs to communicate between switches on the same wire.
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:27
@Joshua if that's true, do you really even have vlans? 802.1q, which allows for multiple vlans in the same switch port via tagging, has been a thing for a loooong time now, and it's hard to find a managed switch that won't do this.
– Joel Coehoorn
Nov 12 '18 at 17:28
@JoelCoehoorn: If I can reassign machines to broadcast domains remotely it's a VLAN right?
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:30
add a comment |
An unmanaged switch will only have one VLAN. Some unmanaged switches will drop tagged frames as damaged, others will strip the tag, and some will simply pass the frames unchanged. Unless you try it, you have no way to know how your switch acts. For the switches that strip the tags, all the frames will be placed into the native (untagged) VLAN as they pass through the switch.
If your VLAN switch is a layer-3 switch, then you are better off using it as the LAN router and creating a routed link to the router, which can act as the WAN router. You will need to either use static routes on the WAN router, or you will need to run a routing protocol between the WAN router and the layer-3 switch as the LAN router.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:55
Ron Maupin♦
62.4k1262118
An unmanaged switch will only have one VLAN. Some unmanaged switches will drop tagged frames as damaged, others will strip the tag, and some will simply pass the frames unchanged. Unless you try it, you have no way to know how your switch acts. For the switches that strip the tags, all the frames will be placed into the native (untagged) VLAN as they pass through the switch.
If your VLAN switch is a layer-3 switch, then you are better off using it as the LAN router and creating a routed link to the router, which can act as the WAN router. You will need to either use static routes on the WAN router, or you will need to run a routing protocol between the WAN router and the layer-3 switch as the LAN router.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:55
Ron Maupin♦
62.4k1262118
edited Nov 12 '18 at 16:14
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:55
Ron Maupin♦
62.4k1262118
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:55
Ron Maupin♦
62.4k1262118
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:55
Ron Maupin♦
62.4k1262118
62.4k1262118
Your VLAN doesn't work like mine. Then again, mine won't allow two VLANs to communicate between switches on the same wire.
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:27
@Joshua if that's true, do you really even have vlans? 802.1q, which allows for multiple vlans in the same switch port via tagging, has been a thing for a loooong time now, and it's hard to find a managed switch that won't do this.
– Joel Coehoorn
Nov 12 '18 at 17:28
@JoelCoehoorn: If I can reassign machines to broadcast domains remotely it's a VLAN right?
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:30
add a comment |
Your VLAN doesn't work like mine. Then again, mine won't allow two VLANs to communicate between switches on the same wire.
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:27
@Joshua if that's true, do you really even have vlans? 802.1q, which allows for multiple vlans in the same switch port via tagging, has been a thing for a loooong time now, and it's hard to find a managed switch that won't do this.
– Joel Coehoorn
Nov 12 '18 at 17:28
@JoelCoehoorn: If I can reassign machines to broadcast domains remotely it's a VLAN right?
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:30
Your VLAN doesn't work like mine. Then again, mine won't allow two VLANs to communicate between switches on the same wire.
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:27
Your VLAN doesn't work like mine. Then again, mine won't allow two VLANs to communicate between switches on the same wire.
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:27
@Joshua if that's true, do you really even have vlans? 802.1q, which allows for multiple vlans in the same switch port via tagging, has been a thing for a loooong time now, and it's hard to find a managed switch that won't do this.
– Joel Coehoorn
Nov 12 '18 at 17:28
@Joshua if that's true, do you really even have vlans? 802.1q, which allows for multiple vlans in the same switch port via tagging, has been a thing for a loooong time now, and it's hard to find a managed switch that won't do this.
– Joel Coehoorn
Nov 12 '18 at 17:28
@JoelCoehoorn: If I can reassign machines to broadcast domains remotely it's a VLAN right?
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:30
@JoelCoehoorn: If I can reassign machines to broadcast domains remotely it's a VLAN right?
– Joshua
Nov 12 '18 at 17:30
add a comment |
Yes, you can do what you're suggesting without any problem.
In practice, the dumb switch treats everything as if it's on vlan1. Technically though, vlan tags are removed when leaving access ports and applied when entering. Vlan tags are only kept in the frame between switches when crossing a trunk port. Since you're not creating a trunk between to the dumb switch (or router), then vlan tagging is not an issue.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:59
aletoledo
3084
The router will have the VLAN 10 declared, any problem with your last sentence ?
– Puma
Nov 12 '18 at 16:03
If you're tagging at the router with a sub-interface, then generally you want to have that go into a trunk port on the switch. Since the dumb switch is incapable of forming a trunk, then it might not work as you expect. If you can get the router and the smart switch to both trunk to the dumb switch, then whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags and you'll be good to go. However this is an unusual design and it's better to just put the trunk straight to a proper layer3 switch.
– aletoledo
Nov 12 '18 at 16:15
5
"whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags" That is not a given. The behavior of an unmanaged switch when faced with VLAN tags is undefined, and some unmanaged switches will drop the frames as damaged and some will strip the tags.
– Ron Maupin♦
Nov 12 '18 at 16:44
add a comment |
Yes, you can do what you're suggesting without any problem.
In practice, the dumb switch treats everything as if it's on vlan1. Technically though, vlan tags are removed when leaving access ports and applied when entering. Vlan tags are only kept in the frame between switches when crossing a trunk port. Since you're not creating a trunk between to the dumb switch (or router), then vlan tagging is not an issue.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:59
aletoledo
3084
The router will have the VLAN 10 declared, any problem with your last sentence ?
– Puma
Nov 12 '18 at 16:03
If you're tagging at the router with a sub-interface, then generally you want to have that go into a trunk port on the switch. Since the dumb switch is incapable of forming a trunk, then it might not work as you expect. If you can get the router and the smart switch to both trunk to the dumb switch, then whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags and you'll be good to go. However this is an unusual design and it's better to just put the trunk straight to a proper layer3 switch.
– aletoledo
Nov 12 '18 at 16:15
5
"whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags" That is not a given. The behavior of an unmanaged switch when faced with VLAN tags is undefined, and some unmanaged switches will drop the frames as damaged and some will strip the tags.
– Ron Maupin♦
Nov 12 '18 at 16:44
add a comment |
Yes, you can do what you're suggesting without any problem.
In practice, the dumb switch treats everything as if it's on vlan1. Technically though, vlan tags are removed when leaving access ports and applied when entering. Vlan tags are only kept in the frame between switches when crossing a trunk port. Since you're not creating a trunk between to the dumb switch (or router), then vlan tagging is not an issue.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:59
aletoledo
3084
Yes, you can do what you're suggesting without any problem.
In practice, the dumb switch treats everything as if it's on vlan1. Technically though, vlan tags are removed when leaving access ports and applied when entering. Vlan tags are only kept in the frame between switches when crossing a trunk port. Since you're not creating a trunk between to the dumb switch (or router), then vlan tagging is not an issue.
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:59
aletoledo
3084
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:59
aletoledo
3084
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:59
aletoledo
3084
answered Nov 12 '18 at 15:59
aletoledo
3084
3084
The router will have the VLAN 10 declared, any problem with your last sentence ?
– Puma
Nov 12 '18 at 16:03
If you're tagging at the router with a sub-interface, then generally you want to have that go into a trunk port on the switch. Since the dumb switch is incapable of forming a trunk, then it might not work as you expect. If you can get the router and the smart switch to both trunk to the dumb switch, then whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags and you'll be good to go. However this is an unusual design and it's better to just put the trunk straight to a proper layer3 switch.
– aletoledo
Nov 12 '18 at 16:15
5
"whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags" That is not a given. The behavior of an unmanaged switch when faced with VLAN tags is undefined, and some unmanaged switches will drop the frames as damaged and some will strip the tags.
– Ron Maupin♦
Nov 12 '18 at 16:44
add a comment |
The router will have the VLAN 10 declared, any problem with your last sentence ?
– Puma
Nov 12 '18 at 16:03
If you're tagging at the router with a sub-interface, then generally you want to have that go into a trunk port on the switch. Since the dumb switch is incapable of forming a trunk, then it might not work as you expect. If you can get the router and the smart switch to both trunk to the dumb switch, then whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags and you'll be good to go. However this is an unusual design and it's better to just put the trunk straight to a proper layer3 switch.
– aletoledo
Nov 12 '18 at 16:15
5
"whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags" That is not a given. The behavior of an unmanaged switch when faced with VLAN tags is undefined, and some unmanaged switches will drop the frames as damaged and some will strip the tags.
– Ron Maupin♦
Nov 12 '18 at 16:44
The router will have the VLAN 10 declared, any problem with your last sentence ?
– Puma
Nov 12 '18 at 16:03
The router will have the VLAN 10 declared, any problem with your last sentence ?
– Puma
Nov 12 '18 at 16:03
If you're tagging at the router with a sub-interface, then generally you want to have that go into a trunk port on the switch. Since the dumb switch is incapable of forming a trunk, then it might not work as you expect. If you can get the router and the smart switch to both trunk to the dumb switch, then whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags and you'll be good to go. However this is an unusual design and it's better to just put the trunk straight to a proper layer3 switch.
– aletoledo
Nov 12 '18 at 16:15
If you're tagging at the router with a sub-interface, then generally you want to have that go into a trunk port on the switch. Since the dumb switch is incapable of forming a trunk, then it might not work as you expect. If you can get the router and the smart switch to both trunk to the dumb switch, then whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags and you'll be good to go. However this is an unusual design and it's better to just put the trunk straight to a proper layer3 switch.
– aletoledo
Nov 12 '18 at 16:15
5
5
"whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags" That is not a given. The behavior of an unmanaged switch when faced with VLAN tags is undefined, and some unmanaged switches will drop the frames as damaged and some will strip the tags.
– Ron Maupin♦
Nov 12 '18 at 16:44
"whatever packets that cross the dumb switch will still contain the vlan tags" That is not a given. The behavior of an unmanaged switch when faced with VLAN tags is undefined, and some unmanaged switches will drop the frames as damaged and some will strip the tags.
– Ron Maupin♦
Nov 12 '18 at 16:44
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Network Engineering Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f54645%2fposible-to-connect-vlan-switch-through-dumb-switch%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Normally it would not be a problem.
– Cown
Nov 12 '18 at 15:53
1
Possible? Yes. Recommended? No. A "hub" that isn't vlan aware could do anything with tagged traffic. The biggest problem: the frames are now 4 bytes bigger, which can cause them to be dropped as oversized. (1518 vs 1514) In the absolute worst case, your "hub" crashes when presented tagged traffic. (a Cisco 2900XL, for example)
– Ricky Beam
Nov 12 '18 at 19:05
1
Can you reconfigure things so the unmanaged switch is not in that path? Would be a better network design if so.
– Criggie
Nov 12 '18 at 19:43
Did any answer help you? If so, you should accept the answer so that the question doesn't keep popping up forever, looking for an answer. Alternatively, you could post and accept your own answer.
– Ron Maupin♦
Dec 21 '18 at 2:49