SG200-26P sans VLANS ?

[brucilious]

I have a new SG200-26P and am trying to get it working as simply as possible.

Does it work if I delete all VLANS and let all traffic pass thru all ports untagged ?

Are VLANS essential or mandatory for users who don't need them in a small network ?

Can removing all VLANS make this work like an unmanaged (or very lightly managed) switch ?

I searched the Admin manual for answers, but it gives none.

So many thanks for any replies.

[Brandon Svec]

Yes, you can do this.  Take it out of the box and plug it in and done

You always need one default VLAN.  VLAN1 is default. 

These switches have all ports as trunks by default for some reason, but don't let that confuse you.  If you don;t create or apply and VLANs then they essentially works as access ports.  If you wanted to, I guess you could change all ports to access and leave them in default VLAN1 for best approximation of basic, unmanaged switch.

-- please remember to rate helpful posts --

[sammycbmi]

I have one of these and connecting it to a 3560 via a trunk is a pain in the butt because of the stupid backwards trunk functionality compared to a real Cisco switch.

[Tom Watts]

Is it really so backwards? A lot of vendors do not use a transparent trunk that allows all VLANs without a special configuration (such as SLAN). I think you're spoiled by this feature as it suits your needs better.

But if you want... make the port a general port and disable ingress filtering. That's what a Catalyst does without being technical about it.

-Tom
Please mark answered for helpful posts

[Brandon Svec]

Good point.  This reminds me of voice vlan implementation on Catalyst switches.  I have had Cisco engineers argue with me that an access port with voice vlan enabled is not actually a trunk port mostly because in show run it does not explicitly show that it is configured as a trunk..

-- please remember to rate helpful posts --

[sammycbmi]

Cisco is the standard how I see things. All others are messed up.

I won't hijack the thread as I'm about to open my own on getting this thing working right in my environment and the best practices way to do it.

Good idea I guess wtih the general port.

[Tom Watts]

Buahaha, that one I won't disagree. IOS for me is still a lot more intuitive and easier to figure out. I work on a lot of Calix E7, Telco T5CXG, Lucent Omniswitch and 7210/7450/7750 and Adtran TA5000 (which is tremendously Cisco-esque) and I don't feel they're quite up to snuff as far as being configuration friendly / intuitive

But I could amusingly counter that Cisco's dark ages certainly reside with the old IGX/MGX/BPX switches which I would take a Lucent, Adtran or  Nortel switch over those flavors any day of the week. But let's not travel back in the ATM time capsule.

-Tom
Please mark answered for helpful posts