Working with SwOS 2.18 on a CRS305 10G . . . Using SFP ports, I have a baseline config with my 5 VLANs that seems to work fine - I can see hosts discovered from all VLANs, so pretty sure my VLAN config is good. Once I got a LAG up and running on the same ports, I only see hosts from VLAN 1 . . . Thinking that I simply needed to add the LAG "interface" to the VLANs, I thought that this would be easy.
Unfortunately, I cannot find a way to add a VLAN to anything but a physical port . . .
Am I blind, or is this a fairly big gap in SwOS? LAGs can only carry untagged default VLAN1?
(And before folks ask the question I never asked, IE "Why not use RouterOS?", I have a config there that works fully. It's just overkill for this, stupid slow to boot vs. SwOS, and (based on Mikrotiks published specs) a lot slower on this hardware.
So, let's please keep this on-topic as to if SwOS can do this at all . . . Thanks. (I searched on this topic, and seems that every time someone asked a similar question, massive irrelevant "responses" happen, and the question got ignored . . . )
That's a fully incorrect statement from you. The "Switching Results" table also applies to RouterOS when you configure the device as a switch (with 1 single bridge and Bridge VLAN Filtering).
The "Bridging" numbers are for the case when you cannot use L2 hardware offload, like when you add additional bridges or use incompatible features like Horizon or Bridge IP Firewall.
Yes, they were configured and working on the individual ports prior to applying the LAG. Once the LAG came up, the only hosts seen showed to be on VLAN1.
Well, embarrassingly enough, I ended up answering my own question. Apparently the hosts on the VLANs on RouterOS were lingering in the "hosts" view from before the LAG went up. I found that I had not applied the VLAN tags on the upstream switch LAG port (they threat the LAG and underlying ports as different devices). Once done, eveything showed up on SwOS.
While I need to wait another day or so for more SFP modules and fiber to arrive to test through it, it looks like I will have two viable platforms which will meet my needs.
And for others, this is confirmed to work (no other thread I have found ever came to a conclusion . . . )