Re: Mind Games - MST

That's an odd question since a switch can't run "802.1W". It's 802.1w.
The lower case means it's an amendment to an existing standard. 802.1w
was incorporated into 802.1D-2004 when what we call "IEEE" or "legacy STP"
was deprecated. Yikes then you had 802.1S when it's 802.1s! ;-) Please
tell me it's just a cut and paste error and wasn't like that in the
material you are referencing ;-)

-- 
Brian Dennis, CCIEx5 #2210 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/SP/Voice)
bdennis_at_ine.com
INE, Inc.
http://www.INE.com
On 10/16/12 11:59 AM, "Joe Sanchez" <marco207p_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>All,
>
>
>I really hate questions like this, hence the reason I have problems with
>the CCIE lab.
>Help me understand this supposedly easy question.
>
>s1 =====19/20===== s2
> ||                               ||
> ||                               ||
>21/22                        21/22
> ||                               ||
> ||                               ||
>s3=====19/20======s4
>
>
>*Task 7.1*
>
>Due to large number of VLANS that exist within the current network, the
>decision has been taken to migrate from 802.1 W spanning tree to 802.1S
>across all switches.  Configure 802.1S spanning tree configuration with *3
>instances* as follows:
>
>Region Name: CCIE
>Revision: 10
>*Instance 3* -- All other VLANs
>Instance 1 -- VLAN 10 and 12
>Instance 2 -- VLAN 11 and 13
>
>My Question ???? :
>Do you create;
>instance 1
>instance 2
>instance 3
>
>
>*Task 7.2*
>With 3560-1 as the core connected switch using 802.1S spanning-tree,
>perform *traffic balancing* so that all traffic for VLANs contained in
>Instance 1 is sent out of ports fa0/19 and fa0/20, Instance 2 is sent out
>of portFa0/21 and Fa0/22, and *Instance 0 must not be load balanced*.
>
>Use the port-priority command on 3560-1 to alter the path that traffic
>takes on switches 3560-2, 3560-3, and 3560-4 using interface cost.
>Ensure 3560-1 is the root switch for all instances.
>
>My Question ???? :
>Based on Task 7.1,  the first part of this task 7.2 would lead you into
>only creating instance 2, & instance 1 and leaving instance 0 as the
>All-other-VLANs?  I would understand that if the put that CIST must be
>compatible, this would require me to use instance 0 for all the other
>VLANs, but this is not stated in the question so I'm again overreading,
>not
>reading enough or something.
>
>The second part of this task is confusing: What does this want you to do.
>"apply port-priority only on Sw1, and using Cost on SW2-SW3-SW4"
>
>
>
>
>Sorry, but I really hate the type of language or lack thereof Cisco uses
>on
>the CCIE LAB.
>
>Thanks,
>JS
>
>
>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