Thread Info
  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 20 replies
  • Subscribers 2 subscribers
  • Views 9402 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Suggested
This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

VLANs and Interfaces

tuscani
Hey all, right now we have about a dozen VLANs spread around all seven of the ASG220 ports. I'd like to consolidate or simplify this if possible. Is there a best practice? There doesn't appear to be any rhyme or reason how the person who was here before me allocated\defined VLANs to the ASG interfaces. What''s strange is the trunk ports on the switch that connect to ASG interfaces allow all VLANs. In that case.. why not just allow all VLANs on one ASG port and be done?


This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • 0
    Yes, but with the redundacy of connecting, for example, eth4 and eth5 into one switch while eth6 and eth7 go into another.

    Cheers - Bob
     
    Sophos UTM Community Moderator
    Sophos Certified Architect - UTM
    Sophos Certified Engineer - XG
    Gold Solution Partner since 2005
    MediaSoft, Inc. USA
  • 0 in reply to BAlfson
    Is that really required though since I will be running the UTMs in HA mode? I was just going to have eth4-eth7 on UTM1 go to switchA and eth4-eth-7 on UTM2 go to switchB.

    Example attached.
Reply Children
No Data
Cookie Information Banner