Forum Discussion
Brad_Parker_139
Nacreous
Most likely related to this SOL, https://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/solutions/public/14000/600/sol14684.html, even though it is not directly called out. The VE has no reason to have vNIC VLAN redundancy. I'm sure is has something to do with STP as well. If you have two untagged NICs in the same VLAN you would have an L2 routing loop created.
dragonflymr
Oct 19, 2015Cirrostratus
Hi,
Thanks, I already checked this SOL - looked as not related because trunk was referenced. I can understand (more or less) why it's not very smart to place two interfaces in one VLAN but it should be possible - all docs seems to be saying that.
In https://support.f5.com/kb/en-us/products/big-ip_ltm/manuals/product/tmos_management_guide_10_1/tmos_vlans.html) there is:
"You can associate physical interfaces on the BIG-IP system directly with VLANs. In this way, you can associate multiple interfaces with a single VLAN, or you can associate a single interface with multiple VLANs."
So is above outdated or it's just not possible to do that on VE?
Consider setup when there are two separate switches behind LTM (no LAG/Etherchannel or other redundancy). Each switch is connected to one port on LTM and one port on target server (and there are two separate target servers, each connected to separate switch). So one server is receiving packets via switch 1/LTM port 1.1, second server via switch2 LTM port 1.2. I guess no loops here?
Then I need to place those two LTM interfaces in the same VLAN - possible on BIG-IP device?
If not what solution can be used for such LAN setup? It's customer LAN and current Cisco CSS is connected like that. I have no way to change LAN config and have to migrate CSS to BIG-IP.
Piotr