802.1Q encapsulation is now available on 10BaseT

From the FAQ on this site:
802.1Q encapsulation is now available on the built-in 10BaseT Ethernet interfaces of the Cisco 2610, 2611, and 2612 with Cisco IOS software 12.2(2)T and subsequent releases.

Whoa! Does this apply to the CCNA exam?

If I get question which types of interfaces support qtag/router-on-a-stick, I should now include 10BaseT?

/creamy

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

cisco_trooper

Yay, 10BaseT. Good job Cisco. I'll put one of those right next to my 20Gig Etherchannel.

creamy_stew

cisco_trooper wrote:

Yay, 10BaseT. Good job Cisco. I'll put one of those right next to my 20Gig Etherchannel.

Quiet you! At last my dream of a fully converged network with a single AUI-port 2500 at its core will become reality!

Now, if I could only find a one of those cheesy AUI->10BaseT adapters the world will be mine.

creamy_stew

Mine, I tell you!

/grandeur_stew

bighornsheep

This is not really news, you still need the right IOS on the 2600/3600 routers 10BaseT ports to do dot1q.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/hw/routers/ps259/prod_bulletin09186a00800921e4.html

creamy_stew wrote:

Quiet you! At last my dream of a fully converged network with a single AUI-port 2500 at its core will become reality!

You're using the term converged incorrectly, converged network typically refer to data&voice running together, dot1q doesn't imply this, another meaning refers to a network where all nodes can reach one another, again dot1q is not required for this.

Also, as the link above talks about; the 10BaseT with dot1q support only apply to certain 2600 and 3600 routers, there is no way at all to do dot1q on a 2500 series router.

creamy_stew wrote:

Now, if I could only find a one of those cheesy AUI->10BaseT adapters the world will be mine.

http://www.anthonypanda.com/product.php?prd_id=32&opt_id=57

bighornsheep

cisco_trooper wrote:

I'll put one of those right next to my 20Gig Etherchannel.

Layer 2 or layer 3? I'm using MST for multiple 10Gig switchports and OSPF equal-cost multipathing for multiple 10Gig routed ports, I found in either case, it works much better than etherchannel.

mikej412

creamy_stew wrote:

If I get question which types of interfaces support qtag/router-on-a-stick, I should now include 10BaseT?

Not unless you've seen it in the official Cisco Courseware recently.

The "party line" back in the old Cisco CCNA Network Academy courseware was that you needed at least a 100Mb Ethernet Interface to support 802.1q.

The IOS change for the 261x 10mb interface was a "nice exception" for those of us building cheap home labs.

The other exception is that the 1720 doesn't support 802.1q (or support router on a stick) on it's 100Mb Ethernet interface.

Unless someone has seen something more official recently, I'd stick with the "old" rule.

cisco_trooper

bighornsheep wrote:

cisco_trooper wrote:

I'll put one of those right next to my 20Gig Etherchannel.

Layer 2 or layer 3? I'm using MST for multiple 10Gig switchports and OSPF equal-cost multipathing for multiple 10Gig routed ports, I found in either case, it works much better than etherchannel.

Layer 2. The individual links are actually fairly close in their load distribution, but it wouldn't matter much in this case as the utilization is below 5%. I plan on MST in the future, but I've got a ton of higher priority projects to worry about. The Spanning Tree implementation needs a complete overhaul, but it is not in a "critical" state so it will have to wait....