So let's do a test.
What happens if we move one of these ports into a different villain.
Now earlier when I was doing this test I had some problems and genus 3.
So what I'm gonna do is I'm a shut gigabit 0 2 down and give it at zero or three.
So the only interfaces that are now up 0 0 and 0 1 in this topology just to start with a simple network
to make a point.
So those interfaces are up up the faces on down.
What I do actually is just shut down any other interfaces to make sure that things converge quicker.
So shut down that Drange and this range of interfaces show IP interface brief or so shut down gigabit
3 0 2 3.
So show IP interface brief interfaces are shut down except for those two interfaces.
So gigabit 0 0 gigabyte 0 1 is Route 1 able to ping rodded to.
Yes it is.
But if we put to this interface gigabit 0 1 in TV land to what will happen with the pings.
So switch port access violent to now before Precentor notice the pings succeeds.
I'll repeat this a hundred times
and then hit enter on the switchboard access.
Vigeland c'mon.
Notice the pings are starting to timeout.
So as soon as I moved the port from one villain to another the devices are not able to communicate with
each other.
So spending tree shows that gigabit 0 1 is still in the learning phase of spanning tree so we'll wait
for a while for spending three to converge and then do the test again.
But what I'd like you to see is these two devices were in the same subnet and in the same villain and
they were able to ping each other as soon as we moved one port to a different villain.
They were no longer able to ping each other spending trees forwarding on violent to on port gigabit
to 0 1.
It's also forwarding on gigabit 0 00 on Villon one.
So if we use the show spending summary command we can see that Villon one is forwarding the line to
forwarding.
There are no blocking ports
yet Rato one is not able to ping router to and route it to is not able to ping Rotto one because they
are in separate villans easy route to a way that it's in a separate villaine
the answer is no because no tagging information or no veel and information is going to be sent on this
port.
It's an access port.
So we just have stented Ethan It frames.
There is no violent port information transmitted on any of the frames going out of that port.
Now to prove this let's add some IP addresses on to switch one interface VLAN one IP address 10 1 1
and let's make it 2 5 4 and then interface villaine to IP Address 10 1 2 2 5 4 with a mosque.
Now I need to know shut both of those.
So go back to the land one and no shut it.
So these are layers 3 switched of virtual interfaces on the switch.
We are basically creating a layer 3 IP address on the switch for the relevant VLAN So as an example
the switch can ping Rato one on Villon one it lost the first ping because of all that.
So which one can ping Rotto one it can ping rather too because Ratatouille needs to be configured with
the right IP address for violent to that before I do that.
Notice when I do a capture on that port
traffic from the switch to the router is untagged it's a standard Ethernet frame IP traffic.
There is no tagging at all.
And as a last test what I'll do is configure router to say interface if seriously.
Zero IP address tendered one to two.
So I've moved it from one subnet to another paying two to.
The switch can ping Rodda two on the port is the traffic tagged.
So do the ping again full for ICMP traffic.
Notice there is no tagging information at all.
It's just stented Ethan it.
So what is the summary of the test.
The PCs in the typology are unaware of violent traffic.
These are access ports or untagged ports.
In other words to that one Q tagging is not used on these ports.
Ken Rato one pink router too so it can pin 10 one to two at the moment.
It won't be able to because the roads don't have default routes configured.
So I'm going to turn off IP routing on these routers to turn them into PCs or dumb devices and type
IP default gateway.
And in this case the default gateway router to will be the IP address on Grado one new IP routing that's
a c'mon that turns an expensive router into a dumb device IP default gateway tendered one to 1 or 2
for 4 full Serrato one has a default gateway config it can ping its default gateway Yes it can Kennet
paying Rodda to at the moment it can.
And the reason why is that on these switches
IP routing is configured by default.
However if I typed no IP routing which is true on a lot of switches the pings will not succeed because
the switch is not doing interval and routing to enable him to Villon riding on a three switch such as
this or a physical switch.
You need the IP routing command to route between the villains so to prove this on Route 2 I'll do a
debug IP ICMP so we can see if I see that traffic is getting to the router do the ping again.
And notice they are all the echo replies.
We can do something similar on route a one
and there are the echo replies debug IP packet will give us a low level information.
I'll repeat this only once so I will send one ping which succeeded over the and what you can see is
the packet was routed out of the router and sent to the destination as an IP packet.
So in other words these end devices connected to a switch are no way that the switch is using villans
the configuration of the switches as follows.
Show run interface give it to 0 0.
That port is using default configure which is.
Which means that it's an access Port Vila and one gigabit zero or two is an access port in the land
to IP routings enabled and we've configured the least 3 IP addresses on the TV villains to allow the
switch to rot between the TV lens configured which in turn allows router 1 and to to communicate with
each other.
Now if router 1 and router 3 are put into the same land and router a 4 put into the same Villiam that
kind of information needs to be communicated from one switch to another using Ada to the one key.
So this port needs to be configured as a trunk port.
So let's prove that and then configure it.