Timeline for What is the actual purpose for having a 1:1 ratio between VLANs and subnets?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 3, 2019 at 5:41 | vote | accept | bzzn | ||
| Jan 3, 2019 at 5:35 | comment | added | Ron Maupin♦ | Trunks are used all the time; they are very common. If you had separate switches, then you would need some more expensive router interfaces. The typical scenario is that routers have few physical interfaces, but you create logical subinterfaces that share the single physical interface by using VLAN tags as a trunk. | |
| Jan 3, 2019 at 5:35 | comment | added | bzzn | trunking on a switch/router to allow different l3 networks to share the interface* | |
| Jan 3, 2019 at 5:28 | comment | added | bzzn | Great answer, thanks. This covers the question well. I think the key point learned is that with VLANs -- we have, for all intents and purposes, separate switches. Trunk interfaces make it possible for different l3 networks to share the interface. Is trunking really this common in practice? Or are VLANs really just a legacy concept that was used to save $ on new hardware? If we wanted more separation at l2, I presume we could just create a new subnet and adjust accordingly. But the benefits of VLAN allow much more flexibility by allowing you to do this in software. Is my thinking correct? | |
| Jan 3, 2019 at 5:24 | history | edited | Ron Maupin♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 36 characters in body
|
| Jan 3, 2019 at 5:13 | history | answered | Ron Maupin♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |