STP is dynamic, when we were solely a Milan switched network it was off by default, when we moved to HP it was off by default, now its on by default for everything even HP, I assume if I read release notes on new models I would have known that. I prefer dynamic things be off and we turn them on loop mitigation i guess i can see being worthwhile to have on by default, but generally when you create a loop its by mistake, and if you dont know its on, it creates a dynamic troubleshooting environment I like knowing its generally going to be on, the mikrotik thing was unexpected, global off would be nice when i was just a tech they implemented rstp on the network for redundant crummy links and dicked with the timers the links would flap and kick off a random root run around the network for hours, you cant get greedy with stp
On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 9:23 PM, Faisal Imtiaz <[email protected]> wrote: > very simple.. > > a) it is on by default in CISCO Equipment > b) it catches people by surprise, cause it does not output to logs as to > what is going on. > c) one can only see the status of a blocked port if one issues the stp > command. > but the biggest one is... > > d) Cisco switches will react to STP messages being broadcast from a > totally different section of a connected network... ! > > so, simply by the virtue of 'Cisco of Right' and they have the highest > quantity of switches deployed in the field... and this is one of the > biggest gotchas, when the folks experience it..... they (cisco) > automatically gets the brunt of the black eye !.... > > No one starts a story with .. " Let me tell you how I made a mistake...." > but the story always starts with .." Ahhh what a POS, let me tell you what > I had to endure due to this POS ! ". > > :) > > > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] > > ------------------------------ > > *From: *"Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> > *To: *[email protected] > *Sent: *Tuesday, October 25, 2016 6:18:21 PM > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] stp > > Why do people act like STP is some evil proprietary Cisco thing? If you > don’t want it, turn if off, but don’t make it sound like Cisco pulled it > out of their ass, it’s a perfectly standard Layer 2 protocol. > > > > CDP you can yell at Cisco (although Mikrotik supports it). Certain VLAN > error messages you can yell at Cisco. > > > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Carlos Alcantar > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 25, 2016 4:58 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] stp > > > > on the access side where you might have issues with stp is if your > customer is then connecting to a cisco switch these stp messages between > equipment can get funny and start shutting off ports because one side > supports it and the other doesn't. you'll go crazy locating these issues. > > > > > > > > Carlos Alcantar > > Race Communications / Race Team Member > > 1325 Howard Ave. #604, Burlingame, CA. 94010 > > Phone: +1 415 376 3314 / [email protected] / http://www.race.com > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* Af <[email protected]> on behalf of Josh Reynolds < > [email protected]> > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 25, 2016 2:38:04 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] stp > > > > You veered way off into something I wasn't even talking about. > > There's nothing wrong with a loop protect on an access port, but since its > not an official standard, there will be variances in loop detection > algorithm quality and design between vendors. YMMV. > > That said, there's nothing wrong with STP on access ports either. > > > > On Oct 25, 2016 4:27 PM, "George Skorup" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Care to explain? What's wrong with simple loop-protect on an edge port > facing a dumb customer? > > On 10/25/2016 3:07 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > > *facepalm* > > > > On Oct 25, 2016 3:06 PM, "George Skorup" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Lots of switch vendors and even MikroTik (in the 6.37 branch, IIRC) > support loop protection. If all you care about is stopping a loop, then use > that. Use STP if you need its functionality. > > On 10/25/2016 1:16 PM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > > If one of the ports has a loop, it will block only that port. Obviously, > disable STP on uplinks. > > > > On Oct 25, 2016 1:08 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote: > > But if you only have one upstream connection and you fall, it isn’t going > to do anything, right? > > > > *From:* Josh Reynolds > > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 25, 2016 12:01 PM > > *To:* [email protected] > > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] stp > > > > STP is a safety net. Its not doing much unless you fall. > > > > On Oct 25, 2016 12:44 PM, "Chuck McCown" <[email protected]> wrote: > > How can STP being enabled help anything if you are not using it? > > > > *From:* Josh Luthman > > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 25, 2016 10:10 AM > > *To:* [email protected] > > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] stp > > > > I just learned the other day thanks to Steve the Mikrotik software bridges > are (R?) STP by default. > > > > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote: > > Actually Netonix (one t, no r). I don't know that I would leave it on, but > I don't know how you're using it. > > https://www.netonix.com/wisp-switch.html > > bp > > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > > > On 10/25/2016 9:04 AM, Josh Reynolds wrote: > > Nettonix. > > You could always leave it on... If your access network is layer2 up to > that switch, it could help. > > > > On Oct 25, 2016 11:03 AM, "CBB - Jay Fuller" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > just discovered on one of our nettronix switches spanning tree protocol > was enabled. > > we've run this switch probably four months - no real side effects - but i > don't run stp anywhere > > else. any reason to leave this on? > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team.
