Anthony, Things look good in the MICE switch: Spanning tree enabled protocol rstp Root ID Priority 4096 Address 0019.e254.f340 Cost 2 Port 34 (TenGigabitEthernet0/10) Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec Thanks, Steve On 09/21/2011 06:17 AM, Anthony Anderberg wrote:
Frankly, I'm surprised at the outpouring of love for spanning-tree
I don't know anyone that loves spanning-tree, most people
have more of an abusive older-brother sort of relationship.
I'd lean toward STP being a necessary evil in a L2 environment
where physical control isn't absolute for all the reasons David
mentioned. I also like a bunch of the things Andrew brought up,
but don't have a good feel for what the administration would
feel like. It seems like I've spent the last 20 years either
being disappointed in the performance of simple designs or being
disappointed by the unpredictability of complicated designs...
Anyway, this morning I've changed the main Juniper switch bridge
priority and it appears to have asserted itself as the root.
Steve/Jay/Doug - can you guys confirm that things look correct
on your switches, I'll send you the Juniper's current settings
off-list. Beyond that we can evolve in the direction the group
thinks is best.
Cheers,
Anthony
Anthony Anderberg
Sr. Systems Analyst
NU-Telecom
320-234-5239
anthonyanderberg@nu-telecom.net
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 <http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1>
######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1