I have spent countless hours reading posts form @sindy, @CZFan, @mkx, @efaden, @ dasiu, @Jonte, and many others who gratefully contributed to this topic on these forums. I cannot express how thankful I am for all your posts on this often confusing and complex topic. Sharing your knowledge and patiently helping others is a credit to you and this community. A sincere thank you to everyone.
So - I have finally “mostly” figured out VLANs using the “6.41 new bridge way” as well as getting VLANs working oi the switch chip settings. The latter was new to me. I am using trunk, access and hybrid ports on RB3011 with managed switches backside. Both approaches work and have their caveats which have been previously clarified by the expertise above. I encourage everyone to dig through the forum and get the info - painful I know, but well worth it. I am actually starting to prefer VLANs setup in switch settings…
My question is this - Do you think with recent trend in ROS bridge features and future hardware options that the Bridge/VLAN method will eventually become the standard by gaining HW offloading support? Even though the nomenclature varies by vendor, the switch VLAN configuration feels more “standard” to my layman mind. I am not sure there is a clear winner here. Curious for opinions… Thanks.
Well, with all the different switch chips in use by different MikroTik hardware, I think we need a software layer on top. Then you could choose the hardware you want based on speed, not feature availability. At the moment, RB3011, CRS1xx, and CRS3xx are all different! So, while you may like the switch menu, it does even appear on the new RB4011 device.
We need a standard layer to work with VLAN and let it sort itself out automatically.
Thanks for the response… wow I had no idea the new 4011 did not allow access to the switch chip config. Poor assumption on my part - thanks for setting me straight.
This I do agree 100% with. I have been working in HP for many years and have worked a lot with HP Procurve switches.
The last 15 years I have worked lot with Cisco Switches and Routers.
But have never see a more complicated way to implement and understand VLAN as we have with MT.
It is not only complicated, but you have may ways to do it.
Many Bridges with VLAN between Bridges and Ports. <6.41
One Bridge that is VLAN aware with VLAN on top of it. >=6.41
Using hardware switches.
And you can even combine this.
As far as I have seen you can not use Q-in-Q with only using VLAN on top of Bridge >=6.41 type config.
You need to mix in VLAN between Bridge and Port as well.
@Jotne thanks very much for your reply. I have not been brave enough to try and combine these approaches yet, but I can see where you can get the best of both worlds by doing so. I guess there is “no one bridge to rule them all”… (sorry). it is curious that newer hardware does not have the switch menu even i.e. 4011. Or perhaps they will add it with new firmware later as it is really new. Or the new method will be the only method with VLAN aware bridges. Time will tell.
I have read that thread about 10 times… it is good stuff. I am amazed at your visualizations and drawings - Visio? I could only dream of doing something that well laid out - great work.
Its done in Visio yes. It take som time to get use to the program, but it’s much easier to see some in a graphical view than just using text.
Problem with the new Vlan Birdges implementation is that its some hard to get all into one drawing. Maybe we should use a 3D program
(sorry). it is curious that newer hardware does not have the switch menu even i.e. 4011. Or perhaps they will add it with new firmware later as it is really new. Or the new method will be the only method with VLAN aware bridges. Time will tell.