Re: 10G ethernet and 802.1q

Thanks Pavel, the link helps to clarify my point. MST is defined in
802.1Q, and it is likely that the quote is referring to that. With that
in mind perhaps your judgement of the author may be a little harsh.
While the last amendments were made to 802.1Q in 2005, that is now four
years old. There are various other draft amendments which are likely to
be added in the next version of the standard (see 802.1Qau, 802.1Qbb
etc). As network usage patterns and requirements change, the standards
change to support them.

I do not think it is correct to say that 802.1w replaced 802.1d.
802.1w was the name of the proposed ammendment to 802.1d. 802.1d-2004
amended 802.1d so that STP was removed from the spec, and RSTP replaced
STP. See http://www.ieee802.org/1/pages/802.1w.html
"This supplement to ISO/IEC 15802-3:1998 (IEEE Std 802.1D-1998) defines
the changes necessary to the operation of a MAC Bridge in order to
provide rapid reconfiguration capability."

Proposed amendments, such as 802.1s or 802.1w, are defined separately
before they are incorporated into the standard and I think that is where
the confusion is arising here.

Paul.

Pavel Bykov wrote:
> Paul, to be extremely technical, the current state of .1Q is 802.1Q-2005,
> which is available here:
> http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/802.1Q-2005.pdf and it
> incorporates all of the most recent amendments, including 802.1s, 802.1v,
> etc. And it is one of the most recent standards out there.
>
> In tech talk, I have always heard 802.1Q referring primarily to tagging
> mechanism and it's properties, not it's manipulation, like spanning trees,
> classification, management, etc.
>
>
> P.S.: 802.1d was not improved per se, but instead replaced by more advanced
> 802.1w
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 9:34 PM, Paul Cosgrove <paul.cosgrove_at_gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>> The standards are not static if course. There are often proposals to update
>> existing standards, or to introduce new ones to replace them. TCP
>> extensions for high performance were published in 1992; ECN and the
>> authentication option being more recent examples Changes to 802.1d mean
>> that it is not as slow as it once was, RSTP having replaced the older STP in
>> 2004.
>>
>> There have also been various changes to 802.1Q protocol. It was originally
>> specified according to the old 802.1d standard, but MSTP was included in the
>> ammendments added to the specification in 2003.
>>
>> The full context would make it clearer, but perhaps the author is using
>> layer 3 links with dynamic routing, instead of Layer 2 with MSTP.
>> Paul.
>>
>>
>> Pavel Bykov wrote:
>>
>>
>>> TRILL is the way to go, so is the OTV. but it only builds upon 802.1q, and
>>> does not replace it in any sense.
>>> Whoever said that "the 802.1q...is old and does not support the high
>>> bandwidth requirements for new services / applications." is a moron.
>>> First of all, the sentence does not makes sense. TCP is really old, like
>>> 30
>>> years old, but we are not in a hurry to replace it. OLD does not mean BAD.
>>> Second, it does not mention why it does not support the high bandwidth.
>>>
>>> What author may have meant, if he had any network experience, is that
>>> 802.1D
>>> (notice how .1D is not .1Q) is a protocol with many shortcomings,
>>> including
>>> slow convergence and absence of load balancing, which has to be provided
>>> by
>>> other standards, like 802.1AX, PVST, etc. And that routing will be used.
>>>
>>> But 802.1Q has no equal at this time. If you just want to use routing then
>>> that's fine, but it is substantially different than L2 service enablement
>>> which 802.1Q provides.
>>>
>>> P.S. forget ISL.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Evan Weston <evan_weston_at_hotmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> I went to a Cisco event yesterday and one of the presenters mentioned
>>>> TRILL
>>>> https://cisco.hosted.jivesoftware.com/message/2747 thought it was
>>>> interesting...
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>>>> Shahid Ansari
>>>> Sent: Wednesday, 1 April 2009 4:54 PM
>>>> To: Hash Aminu
>>>> Cc: Reza Toghraee; ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
>>>> Subject: Re: 10G ethernet and 802.1q
>>>>
>>>> Hash,
>>>>
>>>> worked with ISP and havent used ISL ,dot1q is best to go(q in q tunnel)
>>>> 1q also a standard across different vendors and guaranteed to work
>>>> between
>>>> different vendor equipments whereas ISL fails :)
>>>> regarding the VLANS ,who want to create more than 1K/4k Vlans?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Shahid
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Hash Aminu <hashng_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Reza/Shahid,
>>>>>
>>>>> while i will agree with you that most of them are implying to cisco
>>>>> solution, I am aware of using 802.1q in cisco Gears can be less scalable
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> as
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> the # of VLANs grows..hence you will run out of virtual ports (total #
>>>>> of
>>>>> Vlans passing thru a .1q trunk X the number of ports)..mostly the limits
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> is
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 6k per any line card.
>>>>>
>>>>> HTH
>>>>>
>>>>> Hash
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________________________________
>>>> Subscription information may be found at:
>>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Mon Apr 06 2009 - 13:34:04 ART