<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Question about VLAN Egress Priority at Switches (G3G and C5K, stativc vers. assign by auth)) in Network Architecture &amp; Design</title>
    <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/question-about-vlan-egress-priority-at-switches-g3g-and-c5k/m-p/14173#M1577</link>
    <description>Hello,&lt;BR /&gt;
I have the following problem:&lt;BR /&gt;
I have a managed 4 Port-Noname-Switch attached at a switch G3G124-24 at port ge.1.4. The managed 4-Port-Switch is manageable and has its own IP-Address and should be reachable via VLAN ID 400 but tagged.&lt;BR /&gt;
The G3G124-24 will authenticate the MAC address of the 4-Port-Switch. This authentication will set the egress status of the G3G124-24 switchport ge.1.4 to "vlan egress untagged" for vlan 400. That's normaly OK if it would be a workstation but not for my 4-Port-Switch. The 4-Port switch need to work tagged for vlan 400.&lt;BR /&gt;
So I set static VLAN egress 400 on port ge.1.4 and everything is fine.&lt;BR /&gt;
The static enty overwrite the egress state of the authentication process.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Now I had to change the G3G124 to a C5K125-48 and the result is:&lt;BR /&gt;
The mac auth process will overwrite the static port egress value and my 4-port-Switch is not reachable anymore.&lt;BR /&gt;
Is this normal?&lt;BR /&gt;
In the past I thought, that egress static has the highest priority but at the C5 it doesn't looks like so.&lt;BR /&gt;
Any ideas/sugestions are welcome.&lt;BR /&gt;
Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;
Axel &lt;BR /&gt;
   &lt;BR /&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2018 18:46:00 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>ar1</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2018-06-20T18:46:00Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Question about VLAN Egress Priority at Switches (G3G and C5K, stativc vers. assign by auth))</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/question-about-vlan-egress-priority-at-switches-g3g-and-c5k/m-p/14173#M1577</link>
      <description>Hello,&lt;BR /&gt;
I have the following problem:&lt;BR /&gt;
I have a managed 4 Port-Noname-Switch attached at a switch G3G124-24 at port ge.1.4. The managed 4-Port-Switch is manageable and has its own IP-Address and should be reachable via VLAN ID 400 but tagged.&lt;BR /&gt;
The G3G124-24 will authenticate the MAC address of the 4-Port-Switch. This authentication will set the egress status of the G3G124-24 switchport ge.1.4 to "vlan egress untagged" for vlan 400. That's normaly OK if it would be a workstation but not for my 4-Port-Switch. The 4-Port switch need to work tagged for vlan 400.&lt;BR /&gt;
So I set static VLAN egress 400 on port ge.1.4 and everything is fine.&lt;BR /&gt;
The static enty overwrite the egress state of the authentication process.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Now I had to change the G3G124 to a C5K125-48 and the result is:&lt;BR /&gt;
The mac auth process will overwrite the static port egress value and my 4-port-Switch is not reachable anymore.&lt;BR /&gt;
Is this normal?&lt;BR /&gt;
In the past I thought, that egress static has the highest priority but at the C5 it doesn't looks like so.&lt;BR /&gt;
Any ideas/sugestions are welcome.&lt;BR /&gt;
Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;
Axel &lt;BR /&gt;
   &lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jun 2018 18:46:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/question-about-vlan-egress-priority-at-switches-g3g-and-c5k/m-p/14173#M1577</guid>
      <dc:creator>ar1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-06-20T18:46:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: Question about VLAN Egress Priority at Switches (G3G and C5K, stativc vers. assign by auth))</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/question-about-vlan-egress-priority-at-switches-g3g-and-c5k/m-p/14174#M1578</link>
      <description>Hi ar,&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
I believe this command should help.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
"set vlanauthorization disable "&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Once this command is set for that port the VLAN attributes from the Radius server will be ignored.&lt;BR /&gt;
So that the static configuration remains, please check and let us know if this helped.</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Jun 2018 10:32:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/question-about-vlan-egress-priority-at-switches-g3g-and-c5k/m-p/14174#M1578</guid>
      <dc:creator>Karthik_Mohando</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-06-22T10:32:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: Question about VLAN Egress Priority at Switches (G3G and C5K, stativc vers. assign by auth))</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/question-about-vlan-egress-priority-at-switches-g3g-and-c5k/m-p/14175#M1579</link>
      <description>Hello,&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
and thanks for your idea.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
I have tried this but "set vlanauthorization disable " doesn't work in this case.&lt;BR /&gt;
I understand this command so that it will disable all vlan authorization at this port.&lt;BR /&gt;
So all - at the 4-Port-switch connected End-User-Workstations - will not authenticated, too (I didn't check this) and it will only works if authentication is done with RFC3580 (RADIUS Attribute) but our authentication use the "Filter-ID".&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
I will try to build a new End-System-Group where I put the 4-Port-switch management MAC address and create a new Policy/NAC-Rule that will only set the egress state to tagged if this MAC address will appear.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
I will update this entry here if it will work or not.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
best regards,&lt;BR /&gt;
Axel&lt;BR /&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Jun 2018 09:57:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/question-about-vlan-egress-priority-at-switches-g3g-and-c5k/m-p/14175#M1579</guid>
      <dc:creator>ar1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-06-25T09:57:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>RE: Question about VLAN Egress Priority at Switches (G3G and C5K, stativc vers. assign by auth))</title>
      <link>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/question-about-vlan-egress-priority-at-switches-g3g-and-c5k/m-p/14176#M1580</link>
      <description>Hi all,&lt;BR /&gt;
my work around (build a new End-System-Group and create a new Policy/NAC-Rule) works.&lt;BR /&gt;
There is only one situation that fail:&lt;BR /&gt;
If a device that is authenticated and go into the same vlan (400) where the management port of the 4-port switch is, the switch will not be available because the egress state of the C5K-Switch is changed from tagged to untagged.&lt;BR /&gt;
If this device is removed, the C5K-Switch port changed back to tagged and the 4-Port switch is availabe again.&lt;BR /&gt;
For me this is an acceptable situation because it should not appear in or organisation.&lt;BR /&gt;
Regards,&lt;BR /&gt;
Axel&lt;BR /&gt;
(Question not answered but work around is acceptable)</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Jun 2018 19:39:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.extremenetworks.com/t5/network-architecture-design/question-about-vlan-egress-priority-at-switches-g3g-and-c5k/m-p/14176#M1580</guid>
      <dc:creator>ar1</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2018-06-26T19:39:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

