PfSense VLAN + switch tagging trunk questions
I have several VLANs setup on one interface that will be connected to one port on my HPE 1820 24g switch. Should this switch uplink to the pfsense interface be made a trunk on the HPE? Do we tag ports that will serve as trunk?
Yes the switch port should be a trunk connection to carry multiple VLANs.
You don't need to do anything in pfSense to mark it as trunk. The interface serving as the VLAN parent will always send the VLAN packets tagged.
This is probably a question for another forum but in which circumstances would I tag a port with multiple VLANs instead of trunking it? I can't seem to wrap my head around tagging vs trunking. To give an example I have a Ubiquiti AP that I have setup with 3 SSIDs (VLANs) . The switch interface is tagged with the three VLANs.This appears to work. Yet when I read Ubiquiti documentation, it says that I should be using a trunk between the switch and AP.
JKnott last edited by
This is probably a question for another forum but in which circumstances would I tag a port with multiple VLANs instead of trunking it?
You don't. A port is either a trunk port or assigned to a VLAN (including native). About the only exception I know of is with Cisco switches and VoIP phones, where Cisco Discovery Protocol will recognize a phone and put it on a VLAN, while the port is assigned to another. Similar can happen with switches that can be configured to recognize MAC address prefixes, to put phones etc., on a VLAN.
Much of the confusion here is due to the different terminology and subtle differences in the way settings are applied between manufacturers.
The term trunk port or trunk connection is actually a Cisco term I believe but has come to be widely used to mean a link/port carrying tagged VLAN traffic, usually multiple VLANs but doesn't have to be.
I like to think of it like this, effectively there are three options for traffic on a VLAN leaving a switch port:
Tagged; the packet leaves the port with VLAN tags. Trunk port.
Untagged; the VLAN tags are stripped when the packet leaves the port. Access port. The PVID would almost always be set to that VLAN to re-tag the packets coming back in.
Excluded; packets from that VLAN are not permitted to leave via that port.
And indeed some switches mark the ports exactly like that which I always found the easiest to read. At least some HP switches are like that but lower end maybe…
It is better to avoid untagged and tagged traffic on the same link if you can. It's easy to make mistakes doing that. Some switches can behave unexpectedly. However it is valid.
The definitions between trunk port and access port blur when you have a port that is tagged on some VLANs but untagged on another.
They blur even further when you have multiple VLANs untagged on one port! Many (most?) switches won't allow that and it's of 'limited' use. ;)
My own exposure to different switches is limited, open to thoughts on that.
Thanks for your replies.
The 1820 web administration has a VLAN section to define the VLANs and configure the ports as tagged, untagged or excluded. What adds to the confusion is that the web administration also has a separate section for trunking.
More a question for HP, but if tagging = trunking, why can I apply a bunch of VLAN tags to a port in one section and then in a separate assign that port as a proper trunk? I would refer to a manual but the only one I can find is no help.
I've attached screenshots of the web adminstration GUI.
AndyC last edited by
On HP tagging != trunking. Trunking is used for link aggregation. No need to touch that if you just need VLAN functionality.
Thanks Andy. I did a bit more digging and found that same answer too.
…..and there's the confusion! ;)
But that's especially confusing. Good to know. Thanks.