we chose this route because we have new people from different groups that work oncall. Some of those individuals dont know all the tricks and stp issues. It was easier to use the default config and not have meltdowns due to some one installing a blade and causing a mismatch.
Larry Letterman Network Engineer Cisco Systems Inc. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of > The Long and Winding Road > Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 11:08 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Native VLAN 1 [7:55743] > > > ""Larry Letterman"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > Pris, > > > > In our 6509's we used to make the native vlan and the data vlan > > the same and it was something other than 1...if a blade fails and > > we put in a new one , it defaults to vlan 1 for all ports. If the > > blade has trunk ports in it, they get set to native vlan 1. The other > > end is set for something else, this resulted in vlan mismatch in the vtp > > domain, and in a lot of instances we suffered stp recalcs that took > > buildings down for periods of time...we subsequently have returned to > > making native vlan 1 on all trunks and have not had any issues since.. > > > > CL: idle curiousity. as an alternative, can't the replacement blades be > preconfigured on another box, then moved to the box in question? > this is not > meant as a snide remark, or a negative criticism. I think what you are > demonstrating is a well known phenomenon, where people back off / out of > good ideas and good practice as a matter of expedience and convenience. > (And yes, I have been known to have backed off requiring password changes > every 30 days because I got tired of, every 30 days, going from > user to user > to help them log in using a new password.) > > > > > > > Larry Letterman > > Network Engineer > > Cisco Systems Inc. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 3:49 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Subject: RE: Native VLAN 1 [7:55743] > > > > > > > > > Larry Letterman wrote: > > > > > > > > vlan mismatches and major spanning tree recalcs.. > > > > > > Why? Thanks for any more detail you can give. > > > > > > Priscilla > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Larry Letterman > > > > Network Engineer > > > > Cisco Systems Inc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On > > > > Behalf Of > > > > > Azhar Teza > > > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 3:21 PM > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > Subject: Native VLAN 1 [7:55743] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > When Ports are configured as trunk in Catalyst switches, they > > > > still belong > > > > > to VLAN 1 in native column eventhough the ports can span all > > > > > VLANs. What's > > > > > the drawback of changing the port from Native VLAN 1 to some > > > > other VLANs? > > > > > Regards, Teza > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > > Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com > > > > > The most personalized portal on the Web! Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=55783&t=55743 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
