Hi Geoff, On 26/11/13 06:13, Geoff Smith wrote: > I have used both methods and there are advantages and disadvantages to > each depending on the details of your situation. If all things are equal I > would recommend using LACP. The primary reason being simplicity of ongoing > maintenance/management. I had a situation where I needed to add a few more > VLANS to my network and realised that this would change the hash value of my > MSTP. I had to create the VLANS on every switch in the MSTP system to make > it re-converge correctly (even though the VLANS were not required in all > locations). This all turned out OK in the end but in the process I managed > to badly break the entire system as the MSTP trees fragmented during the > process of adding the new VLANS. Luckily I was doing this during a > maintenance window!!! By contrast adding a new VLAN on a LACP system is > relatively painless ( just make sure that you egress the new VLAN/S on both > the LAG port and the underlying physical ports).
Ahh, I wasn't aware that adding a VLAN would change the MST hash and cause re-convergence. Given this I might just have my core switches (which have every VLAN) in the same MSTP region, and will leave the access switches using LAGs and RST. I am actually meeting an Enterasys engineer this week, so I'll have a chat with him too, but thanks everyone for your input and knowledge. -- James Andrewartha Network & Projects Engineer Christ Church Grammar School Claremont, Western Australia Ph. (08) 9442 1757 Mob. 0424 160 877 --- To unsubscribe from enterasys, send email to [email protected] with the body: unsubscribe enterasys [email protected]
