4006 w/ SupIII Configuring Physical Layer 3 Interfaces

[mland]

I would like to know if anyone has been able to create a sub interface in a 4006 using the sup III. I am trying to execute the command:

Switch(config)#interface GigabitEthernet1/1.1

When I enter the command I get invalid command, but if I use the (?) it tells me it is a valid command.

Example:

Switch(config)#interface GigabitEthernet1/1?

It tells me to use a (.)

Switch(config)#interface GigabitEthernet1/1.?

I have the option of using 1 to 4billion numbers

Switch(config)#interface GigabitEthernet1/1.1

error

Can anyone help please?

Thanks

Mike

[rfroom]

You cannot create routed subinterfaces. You need to create a trunk port. The configuration options are detailed in the configuration quide.

[mland]

Thank you for such a quick and to the point response. I like it. Can you expand on why the IOS said it is a valid command for me, please? I have gone over all the documentation I could find on the topic and came to the same conclusion you told me. The thing that bothers me is the IOS seem to think it is a valid command syntax until I try to execute the command. Is this going to be available in later OS releases?

Is this command structure available in the Sup II using the CatO/S?

Thanks again

Mike

[Prashanth Krishnappa]

Since Sup3 runs IOS, you might find the command in the parser but it is not supported. No there is not concept of sub-interfaces in CAT OS based Sup2

[p.sage]

The same applies to policy routing commands, which are visible, and even enterable on the command line, but do not actually work. Cisco will apparently add this particular feature early next year.

It looks like they stripped down the IOS to get it working more quickly on the new Supevisor III, and are then adding the actual functionality back in over time (I'm guessing on this). IPX and AT are also not available

[efrahim]

IPX and AT is releasing next release- 12.1.12. beg, of Sept.