Re: STP vs. flex-link...

Part of it is likely the wording... The "will start working, but not
until then" is key IMHO. With STP, your link is indeed WORKING as one
side will have a block, but the other side will not. So while you are
indeed loop free, you are still working regardless.

It's a little tricky, and may involve a proctor question there. But for
general functionality, you are correct, both will work. Typically,
flex-links (at least their inception design) is for a SP to customer
relationship, and from the SP's perspective, you do not want to run
spanning tree with your customers. Anything that can potentially mess
up your own network is not a good thing! :)

HTH,

*Scott Morris*, CCIE/x4/ (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,

JNCIE-M #153, JNCIS-ER, CISSP, et al.

JNCI-M, JNCI-ER

evil_at_ine.com

Internetwork Expert, Inc.

http://www.InternetworkExpert.com

Toll Free: 877-224-8987

Outside US: 775-826-4344

Knowledge is power.

Power corrupts.

Study hard and be Eeeeviiiil......

Ronald Johns wrote:
> I came across a task (1.2) in IPExpert's Volume 2 Section 5 lab that
> contained this:
>
> "There are two links connecting Cat-2 and Cat-3 together. Make sure
> that if one link fails, the other will start working but not until
> then."
>
> The proctor guide says to use flex-link, but my solution while I was
> working through the lab was STP. If you have set the root bridge as
> Cat-2 (which was part of this task), doesn't this accomplish practically
> the same thing? I know there are more than 1 way to skin a cat, just
> wanted to make sure there wasn't something I'm overlooking...
>
> Thanks,
> Ron
>
>
> 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 Sat Jun 20 2009 - 19:26:58 ART