It will not use both paths as that would defeat the purpose of spanning
tree. To force the paths to both be used, you would have to configure the
ports in a channel. There should be plenty of good information about
spanning tree operation and port channeling at www.cisco.com
Jason Fletcher
"An
Spanning Tree's job is to eliminate multiple paths to a single destination.
If it finds more than one path it will put one of them into blocking mode to
ensure a loop free path. Remember, Spanning Tree runs at layer two and has
no concept bandwidth. If you need to setup equal cost paths to a ce
Actually, the main reason to eliminate multiple paths is because of
broadcast at layer 2. Lay 2 devices have to this forward broadcast, and
multiple paths to a single destination will cause broadcast storm. Layer 3
devices do not have this problem only because they do not forward broadcast,
they e
This is actually not the case. A layer two network that contains a logical loop with
get into trouble with all types of traffic flows. For example, consider a simple
network like the one I'll try and draw below.
Node A Node B
||
-Ethernet 1
Give me an example of a network where layer two has no broadcasts please...
- Original Message -
From: Jack Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Newsgroups: groupstudy.cisco
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2001 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: Equal cost switching
> Actually,
Message -
> From: Jack Yu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Newsgroups: groupstudy.cisco
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2001 1:58 PM
> Subject: Re: Equal cost switching
>
>
> > Actually, the main reason to eliminate multiple paths is because of
> &g
That is why I said the main reason not the only reason. Normally, before
Node A sends any packet, it will do ARP, this will create loop immediately.
Not so normal, you can hard coded the ARP cache.
Jack
""Peter Van Oene"" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTE
>- Original Message -
>From: AndyD <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Newsgroups: groupstudy.cisco
>To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Sent: Sunday, February 18, 2001 8:58 AM
>Subject: Equal cost switching
>
> > Spanning tree is supposed to choose the one best switched path. But if
>you
> > set up two equal cos
Jason is right. This will defeat the purpose of Spanning Tree of creating a
single path to a destination. The primary reason this was designed was to
prevent broadcast loops.
If you want to force it to use 2 paths to one destination, use
port-channelling which statically load-balances traffic goi
I don't think you can put a single port on two VLANS unless you configured
trunking if my memory serves me right.
with Per VLAN spanning tree a particular switch can belong to multiple
instances of spanning tree and in each spanning tree instance, it might be
acting as a root bridge, some ports m
Per my other post, STP prevents looping traffic in general, not simply broadcasts.
Pete
*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***
On 2/19/2001 at 6:50 AM Kenneth wrote:
>Jason is right. This will defeat the purpose of Spanning Tree of creating a
>single path to a destination. The primary reaso
Depending on the architecture of your network, you can balance the traffic
of multiple VLANs across different links by setting the root bridge to
opposite switches.
So if you have an access layer switch feeding into say 2 catalyst L3
switches, you can set the root bridge for VLAN2 to the first Ca
Thanks for all your help. The way I understand it now is that with multiple
vlans using different root bridges, you can have different vlans splitting
the bandwidth - some going in one direction, some in the other. But if one
link goes down, STP will then shift all to the good link. This gives
]]On Behalf Of
AndyD
Sent: Monday, February 19, 2001 11:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Equal cost switching
Thanks for all your help. The way I understand it now is that with multiple
vlans using different root bridges, you can have different vlans splitting
the bandwidth - some going in
At 08:14 AM 2/19/01, AndyD wrote:
>Thanks for all your help. The way I understand it now is that with multiple
>vlans using different root bridges, you can have different vlans splitting
>the bandwidth - some going in one direction, some in the other. But if one
>link goes down, STP will then sh
t;Reply-To: Priscilla Oppenheimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "AndyD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Equal cost switching
>Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 11:21:24 -0800
>
>At 08:14 AM 2/19/01, AndyD wrote:
> >Thanks for all your help. The w
At 11:21 AM 2/19/2001 -0800, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
At 08:14 AM 2/19/01, AndyD
wrote:
>It looks like you need to go to
>layer 3 switching to do any load balancing other than this.
And
>etherchannel is another option for aggregating bandwidth. But
someone said
>with etherchannel using 4
At 04:07 PM 2/19/01, Howard C. Berkowitz wrote:
>At 11:21 AM 2/19/2001 -0800, Priscilla Oppenheimer wrote:
>>At 08:14 AM 2/19/01, AndyD wrote:
>>
>>
>> >It looks like you need to go to
>> >layer 3 switching to do any load balancing other than this. And
>> >etherchannel is another option for aggre
18 matches
Mail list logo
