From: Wouter Prins (wp@null0.nl)
Date: Mon Dec 22 2008 - 11:42:27 ARST
Mahmoud,
The result will be that the switch you're configuring will be the
root. However you will always have the risk someone plugs in a switch
with prio0 and has a lower mac, replacing your current rootbridge.
To prevent against that configure bpduguard/rootguard on the edge of
your network.
Wouter
2008/12/22 mahmoud genidy <ccie.mahmoud@gmail.com>:
>
> I agree with what you have said. But what I mean by my question is regarding
> the end result, there will be any difference between the two methods?
>
> In other words does any if we used priority 0 for the switch SW1, in this
> way we don't give ANY chance for other switches to become root switch as
> long as SW1 is up and running. On the other hand if we used SW1 root switch
> primary, in this case other switches can become root switch if accidentally
> any body manually set its priority to lower value than SW1.
>
> Am I correct?
>
> Mahmoud
>
> On Tue, Dec 23, 2008 at 12:22 AM, Wouter Prins <wp@null0.nl> wrote:
>>
>> Yes there is, when you configure it according to 1. the switch will
>> substract 4096 from the current root's priority in your network. (So
>> it's cabled and working etc :)). For two you're just setting it to
>> priority 0, i wouldnt use that value tho, however i think it should be
>> possible.
>>
>> HTH,
>> Wouter
>>
>> 2008/12/22 mahmoud genidy <ccie.mahmoud@gmail.com>:
>> > Hi Team,
>> >
>> > Any difference between using these two ways of setting the SWITCH as a
>> > STP
>> > ROOT for specific MST instance or VLAN:
>> >
>> > 1- Using the [ Root switch primary ]
>> > 2- Or setting the switch priority as 0
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > Mahmud.
>> >
>> >
>> > 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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 01 2009 - 12:53:09 ARST