Re: PVST Question

Hi Joe,

Thanks.
we can see on the switches is only written pvst. but it is pvst+.
clear for me now.

Regards,
Sai

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 8:34 PM, Joe Astorino <jastorino_at_ipexpert.com>wrote:

> Also, remember that on modern switches you have 3 options right? Rapid,
> MST, or the default PVSTP. So you will never really deal with the old
> original 802.1D protocol on a modern Cisco switch. This is where it gets
> confusing for me as well, because on the switch it says PVSTP but in
> reality
> I believe it is PVSTP+
>
> Regards,
>
> Joe Astorino
> CCIE #24347 (R&S)
> Sr. Support Engineer - IPexpert, Inc.
> URL: http://www.IPexpert.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> walkingwithcisco
> Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 8:07 AM
> To: Cisco certification
> Subject: PVST Question
>
> Dear Experts,
>
> I come across a question PVST when I'm reading BCMSN. Here is :
>
> PVST requires the use of ISL Trunking Encap between switches. >> That means
> we totally cannot use dot1q trunk if we are running PVST. ????
>
> another notable point is (especially for Open Ended Question) :
> In networks where PVST and CST coexist, interoperability problems occur.
> Each require a different trunking method, so BPDUs are never exchanged
> between STP types. >> It will probably come to us as a tricky question. In
> real live network, that mean we cannot run CST and PVST together. ?????
>
> Thanks.
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.374 / Virus Database: 270.12.81/2189 - Release Date: 06/22/09
> 06:54:00

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Mon Jun 22 2009 - 21:11:38 ART