|WikiProject Computing / Networking / Software / Hardware||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Telecommunications||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|The content of IEEE 802.1ad-2005 was merged into IEEE 802.1ad. That page now redirects here. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see ; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. (2010-12-24)|
Needs fixing. 1) While browsing through wiki I found another page on the same subject, but lost the link. Can't find it in my history. The other page and this need to be combined. 2) The links for this page aren't set up right on other pages Metro Ethernet, Carrier Ethernet, IEEE 802.1Q for example.
The descriptions of outer and inner tag are/were incorrect: a new tag is always added in front of the existing tag and will become the new outer tag (see also web reference 1). The graphics are plainly wrong (I work at a networking equipment manufacturer). I will correct the text but the article will then need someone updating the graphics (in vector format please, not JPEG!) -- WikiReviewer.de (talk) 12:57, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
(reply, Shmelyova) You are correct, outer tag is next to MAC addresses, not payload.
Just to be clear on this point: outer tag is tag 1; inner tag is tag 2 (second tag). Cisco's rewrite command on both the 7600 and the ASR9000 use the keyword "second-dot1q" to refer to the inner tag. Please include a reference if you dispute this. --Shmelyova (talk) 21:36, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I was under the impression that Q in Q used the ethertype of 0x9100 in the outer tag and the ordinary Q type 8100 in the inner tag. The graphics states that both tags use 8100. Does anyone knows what is correct? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 13:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
I agree too. The Q-in-Q should have an EtherType of 0x9100. If it had 0x8100, I guess there is no way to differentiate whether it is a 1Q tag or a Q-In-Q tag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 09:58, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm fairly sure that the graphic should be updated to 0x88a8 ... According to http://standards.ieee.org/develop/regauth/ethertype/eth.txt there is no registration for 0x9100.
Merging with IEEE_802.1ad-2005
This article is BAD - and the relevant information should be moved to where it belongs (IEEE_802.1ad-2005) and this page expunged. For a start - there IS NO 802.1QinQ standard - it does not exist! How can a page with this title even be given the light of day on a site such as wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rednectar.chris (talk • contribs) 22:33, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
This merge is completely the wrong way around. Firstly we must understand that "802.1Q" is a trademarked term. Certainly the industry uses colloquial terms like "QinQ" and even "802.1QinQ", but no decent reference material would still refer to anything standardised as anything but "provider bridges" or "802.1ad". In fact, I see people using the two terms quite distinctly, pre-standard implementations are now referred to as "QinQ" and use 0x8100 in both tags, while 802.1ad or provider bridge implementations use the standard 0x88a8 in the S-TAG and 0x8100 in the C-TAG. What I am proposing is that the main article should be 802.1ad-2005 - this reference "802.1QinQ" should be removed as a possible breach of copyright (because it uses "802.1Q" in a non standard way), or if left it should only define the historical aspect of pre-standard Provider Bridges using the now defunct 0x8100 double tag.
I'm afraid I don't have enough knowledge of the finer points of wikipedia to amend this myself, nor the time to do so, but would be grateful if someone could sort this out to raise the standard of the article. Rednectar.chris (talk) 20:06, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
- We can rename the article. What do you propose as a new name? I don't think "802.1ad QinQ" is particularly accessible. The 802.1 guys generally call it "Provider bridging". Does that work better for you? --Kvng (talk) 18:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)
802.3 2008 describes an envelope frame, which allows up to 1982 octets for use of protocols such as 802.1ad, see sections 3.2.7 and 1.4.151. All 802.11q frames are considered envelope frames, not just 802.11ad. But, the original MAC Client data has not been expanded past the original 1500 octets, even if envelope formats are used. 26 August 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 21:33, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
This standard is obsolete, as 802.1ad has been incorporated into 802.1Q-2011. See 802.1 wiki page, 802.1ad reference — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 14:10, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Quoting from arctive: Just as QinQ extends 802.1Q, QinQ itself is extended by other Metro Ethernet protocols.[specify]