Netonix Forums

We are facing some problems with "Q" ports.
Firmware 1.5.14, tried with WS-6-MINI, WS-8-150-AC, WS-26-400-AC, and WS-26-400-IDC.
Same problem with all switches.

Switch1:
Port 1 - Q
Port 6 - T (uplink to switch 2)

Switch2:
Port 1 - Q
Port 6 - T (uplink to switch 1)

Setup above is not working. Get no communications between devices connected to Q ports.
If we change port 1 on both switches to "D" ports, everything works as expected.

When using two "Q" ports on the same switch, everything works as expected between those two ports.

"Explain it to me Lucy?!"

Are we missing something here, or is this by design? I read in another post, only difference between "Q" and "D" is suppose to be the EtherType on first tag in packet (0x88a8 on Q, and 0x8100 on D).

Anyone?

I would also like to know why this is not following the IEEE 802.1ad standard. What is the problem with push and pop on both ether types? I can't understand why this has been a problem for years. Q = 1:any, what's the limitation preventing this from operating normally @ 1:1???

So really, no one at Netonix can comment on this?

I know they should do a better job of responding but you could try sending a PM to the following Netonix employees & link them to this thread to see if that gets their attention:

Dave
Stephen

well, as far as I know, our switches do support Link aggregation (IEEE 802.1ad)

we have 100,00's of switches in the market and i don't remember someone showing us we are not 802.1ad compliant ...i am not knowledgeable enough
about the subject to answer you....hopefully someone on forum can help

802.1ad is QinQ, 802.3ad is link aggregation.
Here we are talking about 802.1ad QinQ.