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
    The idea is to create alternative paths.  If one device dies, things continue to function regardless of which device stops.

    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
    Ok.. so I would end up with something like this:

    UTM1 eth4\5 > aggregate to SwitchA
    UTM1 eth6\7 > aggregate to SwitchB

    UTM2 eth4\5 > aggregate to SwitchA
    UTM2 eth6\7 > aggregate to SwitchB
Reply Children
No Data
Cookie Information Banner