From: Eric Dobyns (eric_dobyns@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Jul 16 2007 - 11:31:41 ART
Speaking of Narbik's materials, they are now available on-line at
http://www.net-workbooks.com/
I'm telling you guys...Narbik could teach my dog to set up BGP.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Eric
Dobyns
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 8:23 AM
To: 'Antonio Soares'; 'Group study'
Subject: RE: Configuring Trunk Ports for Load Sharing
Port-priority and path cost are good if you want to use MST or PVST across
multiple independent trunk links. There's a great example of that in
Narbik's stuff.
Watch out for etherchannel load-balancing, though. To load balance inside
an etherchannel, use:
port-channel load-balance [dst-ip | dst-mac | src-dst-IP | src-dst-mac |
src-ip | src-mac]
To load-balance among multiple etherchannels, you're back to MST/PVST and
port-priority (with a possible recursive load-balancing inside each
etherchannel).
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Antonio Soares
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2007 7:29 AM
To: 'Group study'
Subject: Configuring Trunk Ports for Load Sharing
Hello group,
I was reviewing the STP Load Sharing topic and i couldn't believe what i
saw. In the DocCD there are two examples. One using Port-Priority, the other
using Path Cost:
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/lan/cat3560/12237se/scg/swvl
an.htm#wp1139757
But they are missing one fundamental point here: who is the root switch ???
For the Port-Priority example to work, Sw1 must be the root switch.
For the Path Cost example to work, Sw2 must be the root switch.
Please correct me if i'm missing something here.
Thanks,
Antonio
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Aug 18 2007 - 08:17:41 ART