I didn't get the part when you say that routers are connected to dedicated vlan for management.

Management VLAN would ideally be a different subnet. Does it mean that a dedicated ethernet interface on the router would be required only for management purpose since the other ethernet interface will be used for network traffic.

Thanks.

Hi

What Amit meant is

For eg:U will be connecting u r routers in a switch in which vlan r u going to assign the ethernet port of the switch to which the router is connected.

U will be assigning it in a vlan ie a subnet so if u want to manage all u r routers in the same subnet then u need to assign them in the same vlan.It all depends on you how u will make use of u r routers ethernet interfaces.It doesnt mean that the ethernet interface on the router u use for management that u cannot use it for other purpose.

Thanks

Mahmood

The other option is to have a mangement vlan for your switches and then use loopbacks for your routers. There is no fixed rule that all devices need to be in the same vlan and if you have a routed access-layer it is actually better to use loopbacks everywhere.

Unless you are prepared to dedicate an ethernet interface on a router or use terminal server setup on the console ports you cannot avoid having dual purpose interfaces on routers.

Jon

Hi Jon,

Could you please elaborate on how is it better to use loopback in a routed access-layer.

A vlan by defintion works at Layer 2. So if you manage your switches with a vlan that means all the links between your switches tend to be L2 links (usually trunks).

L2 means STP which in and of itself is not that bad but by extending a vlan across the entire L2 topology you are increasing the vulnerability of the network to STP problems.

If you have a routed access-layer then your L3 switches connect back to the distribution layer switches with L3 links. So no vlan is extended on the link so therefore loopbacks would be my choice to manage them with, just as you use loopbacks on routers.

Jon