cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
1752
Views
0
Helpful
4
Replies

SGE2000 24-port Switch GVRP problem

Gidral.88
Level 1
Level 1

Good day! I have a promlem configuring GVRP on SGE2000. The problem can be described as following: when I configured port no 1 (used as uplink) as trunk with GVRP enabled, all VLANs were transferred to the switch succsessfuly and also were added as a member (allowed vlan) to this port. But when I configured a couple more trunk ports, VLANs weren't included into members for these ports. I have to add allowed VLAN manually. GVRP on these problem trunk ports is enabled and transfers all VLANs well to switches connected to them. Am I missed somehing?

SW ver: 3.0.2.0 ( date  07-Nov-2011 time  15:35:17 )

Config:

interface range ethernet g(1,11,20-24)

switchport mode trunk

exit

vlan database

vlan 7,20-21

exit

interface range ethernet g(1,11,20-24)

switchport trunk allowed vlan add 7

exit

interface range ethernet g(11,20-24)

switchport trunk allowed vlan add 20

exit

interface range ethernet g(1,11,20-24)

gvrp enable

exit

gvrp enable

4 Replies 4

Tom Watts
VIP Alumni
VIP Alumni

Hi Nikolai, what are you connecting to those other ports? If you're connecting computers or something, GVRP won't work unless those devices have network cards that support GVRP.

-Tom
Please mark answered for helpful posts

-Tom Please mark answered for helpful posts http://blogs.cisco.com/smallbusiness/

I connetcted to these problem ports other swithces, of course To tell more, they recieve all GVRP data they should recieve and add all recieved VLANs as members of their trunk ports. But... On master switch, SGE2000. these trunk ports still don't have as members those VLANs which are being transmitted to connected switches.

Where am I wrong?

Gidral.88
Level 1
Level 1

I also discovered that such behavior can be observed on other small business switches too (SG300). And I also found that GVRP registers dynamics VLANs as members ONLY on one uplink port, i.e. on port which leads to rest part of the network. Maybe this is normal GVRP behavior?

Hi Nikolai, the GVRP database behaves 'in order' of last update. Lets say you have 1 master switch with 2 switches hanging off of it. Link 1 has 1u,2t,3t,4t. Link 2 is equal, 1u,2t,3t,4t.  If you modify link 2 in any way, link 1 is also modified (drops all trunk/tag).

I'll be honest, GVRP is a pretty bad protocol. The switches are behaving as expected.

-Tom
Please mark answered for helpful posts

-Tom Please mark answered for helpful posts http://blogs.cisco.com/smallbusiness/