Your output shows some unexpected content in this case. I would have
expected the path costs to be equal. Did you experiment with some of the
fine-tuning options of STP? Also, are you sure that you are not channeling
(Etherchannel)? On the larger Cats (4k, 6k, etc.) PAGP runs by default and
cr
Could you send a config for both switches? How about a
fuller show spantree? A show port on the two ports?
Maybe this is caused by some half-duplex, full-duplex
issue... though I can't rationalize that explanation.
The fact that one port shows the switch as being the
root bridge and the other port
: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 6:26 PM
To: Pierre-Alex; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Dale Cunningham
Subject: Re: DISTURBING: Spanning Tree Protocol Does not Work.
Could you send a config for both switches? How about a
fuller show spantree? A show port on the two ports?
Maybe this is caused by some half-
0 drops
> 5 minute input rate 27000 bits/sec, 11 packets/sec
> 5 minute output rate 76000 bits/sec, 13 packets/sec
> 686489 packets input, 149034582 bytes, 0 no buffer
> Received 2589 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles
> 912 input errors, 22 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun,
(E-mail)
Cc: Lachisho; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Dale Cunningham
Subject: RE: DISTURBING: Spanning Tree Protocol Does not Work.
C2924XL# sh run
Building configuration...
Current configuration:
!
version 11.2
no service pad
no service udp-small-servers
no service tcp-small-servers
!
hostname C29
The 2924XL doesn't have trunking configured on Fa0/21,
while it is configured on Fa0/27 of the C1912 it is
connected to. I would have thought this would cause
baby giant errors on 2924XL's Fa0/21, but it doesn't
look like there are any.
But anyways, try to set it up and see if that works.
The C191
ng just fine. Check the LED's on both of your switches to see
if you see a solid orange glow...
-- Leigh Anne
-Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
Leigh Anne Chisholm
Sent: February 13, 2001 10:22 PM
To: Cisco@Groupstudy. Com
Subject: R
-Original Message-
From: Ahmed Aden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 9:50 PM
To: Pierre-Alex
Cc: Lachisho; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Yonkerbonk; Dale Cunningham
Subject: RE: DISTURBING: Spanning Tree Protocol Does not Work
Just in case, do a 'show port channel' to v
-Original Message-
From: Ahmed Aden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2001 9:50 PM
To: Pierre-Alex
Cc: Lachisho; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Yonkerbonk; Dale Cunningham
Subject: RE: DISTURBING: Spanning Tree Protocol Does not Work
Just in case, do a 'show port channel' to v
, February 14, 2001 1:29 AM
To: Pierre-Alex; Cisco Groupstudy (E-mail)
Cc: Dale Cunningham
Subject: RE: DISTURBING: Spanning Tree Protocol Does not Work.
Okay, here's the jist of things.
The Catalyst 2924XL is the root bridge:
> C2924XL#sh span
>
> Spanning tree 1 is executing the I
dress
> 0050.3EF0.3580
>Designated bridge has priority 32768, address
> 0050.50E2.42C0
>Designated port is 27, path cost 10
> Timers: message age 20, forward delay 15, hold 1
>
> Pierre-Alex
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Leigh Anne Chi
ROTECTED]; Cisco Groupstudy (E-mail)
Cc: Dale Cunningham
Subject: RE: DISTURBING: Spanning Tree Protocol Does not Work.
Hi Leigh Anne and others:
Leigh Anne, I hope you did not loose sleep over this problem At 8:30 PM
after a full day on this problem I went to sleep and crashed
So here we ag
; Dale Cunningham
:Subject: RE: DISTURBING: Spanning Tree Protocol Does not Work
:
:
:Just in case, do a 'show port channel' to verify that it did not create a
:fast etherchannel. If it didn't create a channel, you should see a
:message like:
:
:'No ports channelling'
:
:
:
> Okay, here's the jist of things.
Big huge mondo snip...
> So... do we have an active looped topology? I doubt it.
Likely,
> Spanning
> Tree's working just fine. Check the LED's on both of your
switches to
> see
> if you see a solid orange glow...
Leigh Anne,
I like your style and trou
See comments inline:
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
>Paul Werner
>Sent: February 14, 2001 10:09 PM
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: RE: DISTURBING: Spanning Tree Protocol Does not Work.
>
>>Okay, here
15 matches
Mail list logo