I agree with Henry. If you have EtherChannel configured on the uplinks, you
should not have any blocked ports as EtherChannel allows parallel links to
be treated by spanning tree as one link. Do a show port channel and ensure
Channel Status says channel to ensure EtherChannel is enabled on the
Subject: Design Question - Spanning-tree Protocol. [7:23614]
Hi Folks,
I have a design in which Cisco 3548 XL's are GBIC-stacked on various
floors
of a campus and are uplinked to a core Cat 6509 switch. The uplink from
every floor stack is ether-channeled to the core via two parallel
equal
Hi Folks,
I have a design in which Cisco 3548 XL's are GBIC-stacked on various floors
of a campus and are uplinked to a core Cat 6509 switch. The uplink from
every floor stack is ether-channeled to the core via two parallel equal-cost
paths. One uplink path starts forwarding and the other goes
Hi Folks,
I have a design in which Cisco 3548 XL's are GBIC-stacked on various
floors
of a campus and are uplinked to a core Cat 6509 switch. The uplink from
every floor stack is ether-channeled to the core via two parallel
equal-cost
paths. One uplink path starts forwarding and the other
Hmm, I think your STP/EtherChannel might be misconfigured. EtherChannel
should be
treated as a single logical link. With an STP running on top of it your both
links
should be forwarding. So in case one of the physical links fails, there is
no
need to re-calculate anything with STP.
Are you sure
5 matches
Mail list logo
