No, the PVLAN restriction is a hardware limitation.
Tim
At 12:18 AM 1/20/2005, cisco-nsp-request at puck.nether.net stated:
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 19:27:34 -0500 (EST)
From: "Justin M. Streiner" <streiner at cluebyfour.org>
Subject: [c-nsp] Re: 6500 Port Monitor
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0501191918040.13619 at whammy.cluebyfour.org>
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
On Wed, 19 Jan 2005, Tim Stevenson wrote:
This problem has to do with the particular line card you are using for the
span destination ports, ie, one of the 8:1 oversubscribed GETX blades.
There are two solutions to your problem: either move the gig and 100M SPAN
dest ports to 2 different muxing ASICs on this module (eg, port 1 & port 9,
they are in contiguous groups of 8 ports); or, upgrade to 12.1(26)E, where
this problem is resolved.
By chance would this same fix apply to the same problems with 48-port
FE/TX blades in the 6500s? I've run into problems in the past where I
couldn't span to or from a port if there was a pvlan port configured in
the same ASIC bundle...
jms
1 message in net.nether.puck.cisco-nsp[c-nsp] Re: cisco-nsp Digest, Vol 26,...
