1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Wrv200 Vlan <--->wrvs4400n Vlan

Discussion in 'Cisco Small Business Routers and VPN Solutions' started by DocLarge, Feb 14, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    Okay,

    I'm trying this right now as I speak; this is a curiousity drill. I've done vlan an actual cisco appliances but not the port based version on these two routers (wireless works great, by the way). Here's the scenario I'm going to try.

    I'm going to initiate a vpn tunnel from my edge router (wrv200) to one of the other alpha testers and make port 2 on the wrv200 the designated vlan (vlan2). My internal router (wrvs4400n) has the ability to assign any of its four ports as a "trunk" port. So, I'm thinking of making port 1 on the wrvs4400n the trunk port, which I will plug into port 1 on the wrv200.

    Correct me if I'm wrong Eric, ifican, or kspare, but the trunk port "is not" actually included in the vlan; it merely facilitates the connection. That being the case, in theory, if I have a vpn tunnel coming in to the wrv200, the wrvs4400n should be able to see the vpn traffic, or at least, connect to a resource that can access the vpn traffic, non?

    I figured I should dedicate some time to this SOHO version of a vlan so I can make a tutorial...

    Jay
     
  2. DocLarge

    DocLarge Super Moderator Staff Member Member

    Disregard this thread...

    Eric_Stewart and I got to talking and then it dawned on me that the 200 and the 4400n won't recognize each other's tagged frames. The conclusion is that in order to route vlan traffic from the 4400n, it's going to require another 4400n.

    This thread will be locked for now until I get another one to test this functionality.

    Jay
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page