08-31-2020 09:06 AM - edited 08-31-2020 09:15 AM
Hello,
I stood up a vlan by issuing the following commands:
switch(config)# ip routing
switch(config)# ip access-list extended MGMT_ACL_in
.....(OMITTED)
switch(config)# vlan 2000
switch(vlan-config)# name v2000.03.usr.vlan
switch(config)# int vlan 2000
switch(config-if)# ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
switch(config-if)# desc v2000.03.usr.svi
switch(config-if)# no shut
switch(config-if)# exit
switch(config)# interface Gi0/8
switch(config-if)# desc end.user.ws
switch(config-if)# switchport
switch(config-if)# switchport mode access
switch(config-if)# switchport access vlan 2000
switch(config-if)# no shut
switch(config-if)# int vlan 2000
switch(config-if)# ip access-group MGMT_ACL_in in
% Invalid input detected at '^' marker.
if I issue the command "ip acc ?" I get:
% Unrecognized command
What am I doing wrong? This is the most basic feature of any cisco switch with SVI capabilities. These commands work on every other 2960 I've ever used. If I cannot use access-group, how am I supposed to secure my management VLAN?
Thank you
Solved! Go to Solution.
09-01-2020 11:14 AM - edited 09-01-2020 11:15 AM
I've already discovered what the issue/reason is: I opened a Cisco TAC case and I was told the C2960L series does not support applying ACL's to vlans in any way shape or form. I'm sure this was done to force you to buy another, more expensive switch?
The only way around this that I could think of is to use 1 link for an L3 point-to-point for end user IP traffic and put an ACL on that port and use another link for an L3 point-to-multipoint, use that link to manage this switch, and put an ACL on that port. THIS SOLUTION, TO ME, IS UNACCEPTABLE.
Why give a 2960 routing functionality if you don't even include the most basic security controls found on even the cheapest netgear managed l2 switch?
Why give a person the ability to create VLANs, but not the ability to secure them?
Why would I want a 2960 to route anything but management traffic? Thats what CE's are for...
Why should I have to waste an additional port to management?
Why did Cisco remove this feature?
Who knows?
I'm tired of Cisco's antics just to squeeze another cent out of people.
I'm already in the process of ordering Juniper switches to replace them. I hope anyone researching the C2960L series comes across this. Thank you everyone for your replies, but this conversation is done.
08-31-2020 09:16 AM
interface Gi0/8 is switchport , aka switching port, I do not think you can apply ACL on those type of ports; you can apply ACL on routing ports like SVI interface vlan 2000.
Regards, ML
**Please Rate All Helpful Responses **
08-31-2020 09:28 AM - edited 08-31-2020 09:29 AM
Martin,
Please read my post in its entirety.
An SVI is inherently layer 3 (which is why I assigned an IP to it...). Also note that I turned on IP routing which was one of the first commands I issued. I already tried setting Gi0/8 to a routed port via the commands "no switchport" and "ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0" and the switch takes the commands. The interface can communicate just fine, but the ip access-group command is still not found.
For anyone replying, I know the difference between a layer 2 port and a layer 3 port. I also know the difference between a managed L2 switch and an L3 switch. Thank you.
08-31-2020 09:38 AM
Sorry, did not notice you switch back to interface vlan 2000 with int vlan 2000;
09-01-2020 07:10 AM
I find it surprising that you were apparently successful with this command
switch(config)# ip access-list extended MGMT_ACL_in
but then encounter this
if I issue the command "ip acc ?" I get:
% Unrecognized command
In what you post there is a space before the question mark. What happens if you use the command but no space (ip acc?)
Perhaps it would be helpful if you post the output of these commands
show ip protocol
show ip interface brief
09-01-2020 11:14 AM - edited 09-01-2020 11:15 AM
I've already discovered what the issue/reason is: I opened a Cisco TAC case and I was told the C2960L series does not support applying ACL's to vlans in any way shape or form. I'm sure this was done to force you to buy another, more expensive switch?
The only way around this that I could think of is to use 1 link for an L3 point-to-point for end user IP traffic and put an ACL on that port and use another link for an L3 point-to-multipoint, use that link to manage this switch, and put an ACL on that port. THIS SOLUTION, TO ME, IS UNACCEPTABLE.
Why give a 2960 routing functionality if you don't even include the most basic security controls found on even the cheapest netgear managed l2 switch?
Why give a person the ability to create VLANs, but not the ability to secure them?
Why would I want a 2960 to route anything but management traffic? Thats what CE's are for...
Why should I have to waste an additional port to management?
Why did Cisco remove this feature?
Who knows?
I'm tired of Cisco's antics just to squeeze another cent out of people.
I'm already in the process of ordering Juniper switches to replace them. I hope anyone researching the C2960L series comes across this. Thank you everyone for your replies, but this conversation is done.
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide