From: Cielieska Nathan (ncielieska@gmail.com)
Date: Wed Dec 12 2007 - 17:42:43 ART
George,
That is interesting. Thanks for the feedback.. if that is the case
then i would be a little concerned with the question:
> *SW1 should be set such that it would remain the root if even
> other switches are added to the network in future
The setting of 4096 wouldn't guarantee that... (another vendor
switch, etc.)
Is there something i'm missing from a command perspective? Is there
something dynamic that will react to a spanning-tree priority coming
in lower than its own?
Nate
On Dec 12, 2007, at 3:11 PM, George Goglidze wrote:
> Hi Nathan,
>
> It does not actually react dynamically when the new router is added.
>
> the "spanning-tree vlan 20,30,40 root primary " is just a script
> which will check current root switch's priority, and set 4096 less.
> as well it calculates hello-interval and forward-interval if I'm
> not mistaken, if you specify your network's size.
>
> but once the script is run, and later if you add another switch
> with better priority,
> it does not mean you will have your router re-calculate the
> priority again.
>
> And as to the initial question, I'd just put 4096 as priority and
> that's it.
> also maybe I would ask proctor if new switches are going to have
> default configuration of spanning tree or not.
>
> Regards,
>
>
> On Dec 12, 2007 8:22 PM, Cielieska Nathan <ncielieska@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> Felix
>
> Do a spanning-tree vlan 20,30,40 root primary.
>
> The reason i would do that is because there are other calculations
> besides priority that can come into play. Setting the root command
> will allow the switch to react dynamically to spanning-tree elections
> by tuning things in its favor to become root.
>
> Regards,
> Nate
>
> On Dec 12, 2007, at 12:07 PM, Felix Nkansah wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am considering a spanning-tree task (dont have the answers tho).
> >
> > *It requires that, of the four switches in the network, SW1 be set
> > as the
> > root for VLANs 20, 30, 40.*
> > **
> > *SW1 should be set such that it would remain the root if even other
> > switches
> > are added to the network in future.*
> >
> > Would setting a command like *'spanning-tree vlan 20,30,40 priority
> > 0'* be a
> > good solution?
> >
> > I'm afraid the *'spanning-tree vlan 20,30,40 root primary'* command
> > may not
> > be able to cater for the 'future switches' caveat.
> >
> > Let me have your expert opinions, please.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Felix
> >
> >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> > _
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Jan 01 2008 - 12:04:30 ARST