Well said … it’s incredibly rare to see someone set this in their networks ….
(yes, I’m reading emails backwards and catching up) > On Oct 25, 2016, at 11:22 PM, Jesse DuPont <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I don't know what all vendors use for their defaults, but one of the simplest > things you can do to help stabilize RSTP is to be intentional about which > device is the root bridge (i.e. closest switch/bridge to traffic > egress/ingress or core or what ever you define as the "root"). Make sure that > device has the lowest priority so that all other bridges are working to have > the best path to that device. if you want traffic in a bridged network to > flow a specific way, you can influence that with RSTP path cost. None of this > replaces routing (ducks), but it's better than leaving them all at default > priority and letting them elect the root. > > Jesse DuPont > Network Architect > email: [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> > Celerity Networks LLC > Celerity Broadband LLC > Like us! facebook.com <http://facebook.com/celeritynetworksllc>/ > <http://facebook.com/celeritynetworksllc>celeritynetworksllc > <http://facebook.com/celeritynetworksllc> > Like us! facebook.com > <http://facebook.com/celeritybroadband>/celeritybroadband > <http://facebook.com/celeritybroadband> > <celeritynetworks-GIF.gif> > On 10/25/16 9:08 PM, That One Guy /sarcasm wrote: >> 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] >> <mailto:[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 <tel:305%20663%205518%20x%20232> >> >> Help-desk: (305)663-5518 <tel:%28305%29663-5518> Option 2 or Email: >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> >> From: "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> To: [email protected] <mailto:[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] <mailto:[email protected]>] On >> Behalf Of Carlos Alcantar >> Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 4:58 PM >> To: [email protected] <mailto:[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 <tel:%2B1%20415%20376%203314> / [email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> / http://www.race.com <http://www.race.com/> >> >> From: Af <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of >> Josh Reynolds <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2016 2:38:04 PM >> To: [email protected] <mailto:[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] >> <mailto:[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] >> <mailto:[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] >> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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] >> <mailto:[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] <mailto:[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 <tel:937-552-2340> >> Direct: 937-552-2343 <tel:937-552-2343> >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Bill Prince <[email protected] >> <mailto:[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 >> <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] >> <mailto:[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. > >
