Re: covergence in RSTP

Hi brian,

Agreed on that part......

But my doubt is how things will work in non-cisco environment e.g juniper
,HP etc...

Is this vendors have alternate command....or edge ports will still suffer.
from time dealy...........................................
I m sorry but nt have any expereince with non-cisco swithes....just want to
understand the protocol from deep....as how RSTP behaves for access
ports.... in general...

regards,
Shekhar
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 6:54 PM, Brian McGahan <bmcgahan_at_ine.com> wrote:

> Hi Shekhar,
>
> It's technically not portfast, its configuring the link as an edge port.
> In Catalyst IOS when you're running RSTP the links don't run as edge ports
> automatically. Instead of adding a "spanning-tree edge" or similar
> command, they simply made the "spanning-tree portfast" command do the same
> thing. The idea is that if you're migrating from legacy PVST to Rapid PVST
> or to MST, your ports that used to be portfast ports now become edge ports.
> They basically do the same thing, but in RSTP they're called edge ports
> instead of portfast ports.
>
>
> HTH,
>
> Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593 (R&S/SP/Security)
> bmcgahan_at_INE.com
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.INE.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Bruno Silva
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 9:36 AM
> To: shekhar sharma
> Cc: Cisco certification
> Subject: Re: covergence in RSTP
>
> you will still have to use portfast even with RSTP due to standard
> specifications.
>
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 9:49 AM, shekhar sharma
> <shekhar.sharma21_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Hi Experts ,
> >
> > I know RSTP is mush faster than legacy STP or PVST because of its
> > alternate ,,,back ports & a different algorithm to achive faster
> > convergence in the interswitch links & uplinks.
> >
> > But I am little confused about its behaviour for edge ports i.e access
> > ports.
> >
> > Yesterday I have done some tests ,,,.Observation is without enablings
> > portfast on acess ports ,if I am doing shut/noshut on that accessport
> > interface. convergence is slow and I am getting 10 packet drops b/w
> > the pings.
> >
> > But with portfast enabled , convergence is faster and my gettig 2-3
> > packet drop.
> >
> > So, the question is if portfast is still required in RSTP ,then how
> > will we utilize its use in non-cisco environment .since portfast is
> > cisco propriteiry.....
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Shekhar
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > ______________________________________________________________________
> > _ Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Mon Jun 25 2012 - 19:22:19 ART