- There are not any issues that we know of specifically regarding cable modems or Cox and LLDP. The suggestion to disable LLDP comes from the fact that, in our experience, there may be equipment that do not know or are aware of how to handle LLDP packets that are being received.
Since the ethernet interface is in a bridge-group, the QoS map will not work. As was mentioned above, there is an alternative way to configure what you have setup and remove bridging all together. This can be done by making 3 switchports part of VLAN 998 and using one of them as the WAN interface. The other 2 switchports could be used as passthrough ports as you already have set up. There would be no need to bridge the ethernet and VLAN interfaces together. At that point, you could apply the QoS map to the VLAN 998 interface.
I hope this answers your questions, but please do not hesitate to let us know if you have any further issues or questions.
Is it possible to use one or more eth ports in conjunction with the switch ports for WAN pass through?
We have many routers already deployed with their WAN IP assigned to eth 0/1, and customer equipment connected to switchports.
Our goal is to keep our router at the top of the customer's network, and allow them to use the remaining IP addresses in their public subnet on their own equipment, behind our router.
The intention is to do things like QoS, put the voice lan through the Adtran SIP Proxy, while the customer's data lan is going through their own firewall.
We've been using BVI for the WAN IP, but now we know the BVI doesn't support QoS and breaks the SIP Proxy ().
We'd also like to reserve eth 0/2 for secondary WAN failover, with the same prospect of pass through & QoS.
eth 0/1 - Primary WAN interface 18.104.22.168/29, ISP gateway 22.214.171.124
eth 0/2 - Secondary WAN interface 126.96.36.199/29, ISP gateway 188.8.131.52
switchport 0/1-0/6, vlan 20, voice lan 172.16.20.1/24 (IP phones, Adtran SIP Proxy)
switchport 0/8, vlan ?, pass through 184.108.40.206-220.127.116.11 for customer equipment (servers, data lan firewall WAN1, etc.)
switchport 0/7, vlan ?, pass through 18.104.22.168-22.214.171.124 for customer equipment (servers, data lan firewall WAN2, etc.)
- You would not be able to do that without bridging or without splitting the subnet, which would have you burn 2 of the IPs in that range. Another solution you could have is just using the switchports as your WAN interface, and assigning the passthrough ports to the same VLAN.
Let me know if you have any questions.
Thank you so much noor!
This confirms my suspicion that BVI was never the way for us to go, since we need "media-gateway ip primary" and QoS on the WAN interface, neither of which seem to get along with BVI.
We had been using the switchport method before, and I think some overzealous engineer decided to "improve" things by moving to BVI, assuming it would work the same way as Brand C.
QoS will not work on BVI interfaces
BVI interface and media gateway