On 3/28/2011 3:09 PM, Tim Stevenson wrote:
For one thing you could provide up to 256 10G links between two boxes, something you could not do with STP.
Is this 16 links active per path? If so, what's the LACP game being played?
Tim and/or Lincoln, I was hoping you could comment on a couple of other things.
1) The configuration guide recommends that all L2 FP gateways be configured as 8192 priority but do not specify them needing to be root. I'm guessing the docs want the gateways to be root. I think that would have some design implications (FHRP, as well as having to actively take root away from your existing bridge(s)). Would you comment on why this is? All ports need to be designated? I assumed it was an optimal traffic flow to/from the FP domain and the ability to proactively stop loops.
2) In the docs, it states that the FP network automatically presents a single bridge to all CE devices. I assume when you enable FP on the gateways, it plays a vPC peer switch game of the single bridge ID presentation. Or, something similar?
3) In the docs it recommends not to use the vPC peer switch feature. Is this because of the multipath calc in the FP domain? Any implications from a STP role change here?
4) QoS? 5) PLVAN type feature? Thanks! tv _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
