Always in the back of my head: STP

From: lim es (tiga72@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Jan 09 2006 - 00:26:25 GMT-3

• Next message: Yinglam Cheung: "Re: SP CCIE"
• Previous message: Jonathan Stevens: "Please ignore"
• Next in thread: Balaji Siva: "Re: Always in the back of my head: STP"
• Maybe reply: Balaji Siva: "Re: Always in the back of my head: STP"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Hi Group,

I am still pretty shaky on STP concepts. I know in
short, it is needed to provide a loop-free path in
multiaccess networks, have it thought over, i've laid
out some scenario, i am not too sure if i got it
correct, would sure appreciate some advice
on this.

Suppose we have

[sw1]-------[sw2]

sw1 & sw2 etherchannel(L2) mode Need STP?

1 link NA Access Required

2 links no Access Required

2 links Yes Access Required

1 link NA Trunk Not required

2 links no Trunk Required

2 links Yes Trunk Not required*

L2: Layer 2 aggregation

* switch will look at it as a single link, hence STP
not required.

All Layer 3 inplementation of etherchannel will not
need to run STP

Please correct me if i am wrong

Thanks

                
__________________________________________
Yahoo! DSL  Something to write home about.
Just $16.99/mo. or less.
dsl.yahoo.com

• Next message: Yinglam Cheung: "Re: SP CCIE"
• Previous message: Jonathan Stevens: "Please ignore"
• Next in thread: Balaji Siva: "Re: Always in the back of my head: STP"
• Maybe reply: Balaji Siva: "Re: Always in the back of my head: STP"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Feb 01 2006 - 07:45:47 GMT-3