06-05-2007 06:57 PM - edited 03-05-2019 04:30 PM
What's better for performance - routed ports or Vlan ports?
I'm going to configure separate 6509 interfaces for ingress & egress traffic to/from a web-cache, interfaces on different subnet for legacy reasons.
What is the best for performance, routed ports or Vlan ports? or does it not matter?
Thanks
Marc.T
06-05-2007 09:17 PM
Marc,
The decision should be based on what exactly are you planning to do. If you do not want the VLAN to be extended then routed ports are the way to go.
If you want have different vlans configured and want intercommunication, VLAN interfaces or SVI's would be prefered
HTH, rate if it does
Narayan
06-05-2007 09:25 PM
Thanks for the reply Narayan.
I'd like to base the decision upon performance. If it's more efficient for the 6500 to switch to a Vlan port or a routed port will determine the outcome.
Marc.T
06-05-2007 09:35 PM
I dont think there would be any performance difference as all decisions would be performed on hardware
Narayan
06-12-2007 05:53 AM
I remember hearing a Networkers session that when a bunch of interfaces go down, the routed interfaces drop immediately and the down is conveyed immediately to the control plane (routing process).
However, VLAN interfaces have a backoff mechanism that causes the control plane to be notified in increasingly longer intervals.
I can't verify this with actual documentation, but maybe someone else can point to some.
06-12-2007 09:15 PM
Thanks - I'll check my Networker archives for any clues.
06-13-2007 12:26 AM
Yes Jonathan,
because the device must check if another switchport for that VLAN (in access or in trunk) is up. The SVI goes down when all VLAN interfaces are down. In some cases something like "auto-tunnel" does the trick.
HTH
Andrea
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