From: Donny MATEO (donny.mateo@sg.ca-indosuez.com)
Date: Thu Sep 26 2002 - 00:21:43 GMT-3
hmm..if this is with context with CCIE lab exam, don't you think we ough to leave the decision to
the proctor on which is the way he likes it to be done.
Give the proctor a menu of solutions to choose from, and see what he says...:)
Donny
elping
<elpingu@acedsl.c To: Balaji Siva <bsivasub@cisco.com>
om> cc: Chris <clarson52@comcast.net>, "Voss, David" <dvoss@heidrick.com>,
Sent by: ccielab@groupstudy.com
nobody@groupstudy Subject: Re: Consensus
.com
26-09-2002 10:55
Please respond to
elping
good point
Balaji Siva wrote:
> inline
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> Chris
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 10:03 PM
> To: Voss, David; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Consensus
>
> What happens when the switch hosting the root guard command goes down, get's
> turned off etc?
>
> ### obviously the switch in question would be isolated and becomes a root.
> but then point of STP root in a isolated switch is meaningless. It becomes a
> useless feature...
>
> The ONLY way to ensure a switch or vlan will NEVER become root is to disable
> spanning-tree on that switch or vlan, or turn off the switch.
>
> ### this is just taking the word too literally..and impractical solution..i
> guess may be that is what is needed for the lab.
>
> ALL spanning-tree decision are based on the concept of a root. If you are
> running spanning-tree there is a root somewhere. You cannot guaruntee that
> any particular switch will never become root when this is the case. You have
> to turn it off.
>
> ### understood..but again this issue to taken too literally...
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Voss, David" <dvoss@heidrick.com>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 9:03 PM
> Subject: RE: Consensus
>
> > So the consensus for the following (I'm adapting it a bit):
> >
> > Make sure that your switch "never" becomes root for vlan 20.
> >
> >
> >
> > root guard on the port hosting VLAN20 if you have 2 or more switches
> sharing
> > VLAN20
> >
> > and
> >
> > disable spanning tree for VLAN20 if you have 1 switch
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Balaji Siva [mailto:bsivasub@cisco.com]
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 7:59 PM
> > To: Nick Shah; Voss, David; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: Consensus
> >
> >
> > This makes more sense..though the config is actually made on the
> > neighbouring switches !!!
> >
> > It is probably used on distribution/core to prevent small access switches
> > from becoming root..
> >
> > B
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
> > Nick Shah
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2002 8:42 PM
> > To: Voss, David; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: Consensus
> >
> >
> > Set spantree guard is the ONLY sure shot way.
> >
> > I am willing to bet my $$$ on this one.
> >
> > To raise the odds on the bet :)
> >
> >
> http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/cat5000/rel_6_1/config/s
> > pantree.htm#xtocid2856623
> >
> > rgds
> > Nick
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Voss, David" <dvoss@heidrick.com>
> > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2002 9:51 AM
> > Subject: Consensus
> >
> >
> > > I've been going through the threads on spanning tree and one thread that
> > > never had a consensus was how to ensure a switch would "never" become
> > root.
> > > There is not a text I have found that addresses this. From what I can
> > tell,
> > > one option is to turn off spanning tree completely, the other to set
> > > priority to 65535. Neither sounds appropriate to me.
This message is for information purposes only and its content
should not be construed as an offer, or solicitation of an offer,
to buy or sell any banking or financial instruments or services
and no representation or warranty is given in respect of its
accuracy, completeness or fairness. The material is subject
to change without notice. You should take your own independent
tax, legal and other professional advice in respect of the content
of this message. This message may contain confidential or
legally privileged material and may not be copied, redistributed
or published (in whole or in part) without our prior written consent.
This email may have been intercepted, partially destroyed,
arrive late, incomplete or contain viruses and no liability is
accepted by any member of the Credit Agricole Indosuez group
as a result. If you are not the intended recipient of this message,
please immediately notify the sender and delete this message
from your computer.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Oct 07 2002 - 07:44:04 GMT-3