From: Jason (jgraun@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sun Apr 07 2002 - 20:53:14 GMT-3
That might work but if another switch gets added to the STP domain and
your switch has a lower mac-address then it will become the root bridge
assuming that the priority is 65535. I thought I read somewhere that
using 0 will make sure that it will never become a root bridge.
Jason
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Bob Sinclair
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 5:04 PM
To: Larry Whitfill
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Lab Tomorrow! Need Help
Larry,
I would suggest making the bridge priority 65535, the highest possible
value.
Good luck!
-Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Whitfill" <whitfill@cox.net>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 07, 2002 5:43 PM
Subject: Lab Tomorrow! Need Help
> Hello fellow CCIE waqnnabes and accomplished CCIEs!
>
> I'm sittingin my hotel 13 hours from ground zero and needed some
> clarification and help.
>
> 1. When one wants to ensure that his switch does not become root under
any
> circumstance does he set the bridge priority to 0, does he set the
priority
> to the highest possible value, or does he do someting entirely
different.
> This has been kicked around quite a bit, but I never found a
difinitive
> answer here or on CCO, books, etc., and don't have two CATs to test.
>
> 2. When using DLSW+ peer-on-demand, do I also have to configure a
border
> peer, use the promiscuous keyword, both or neither?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Larry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:57:59 GMT-3