Unless the other side of Gi0/46 is blocked, i don't think it's an issue
to see traffic on a designated port.
On the other hand, if this switch has dual uplinks to the pri/sec root
switches, then somewhere else there must be a blocked port.
--
Tassos
Cord MacLeod wrote on 27/03/2010 08:47:
3 days ago traffic started showing up on the trunk port connecting my top of
rack switches. Each of these switches has it's own better trunk path to the
root bridge. I can't see why any traffic at all would traverse these links
unless the other trunk on g0/45 was down, which it isn't. Also, spanning tree
doesn't claim any topology changes.
switch3#sh spanning-tree root port
VLAN0001 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0100 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0101 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0102 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0120 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0200 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0231 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0250 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0321 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0450 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0777 GigabitEthernet0/45
VLAN0888 GigabitEthernet0/45
switch3#
All vlans read same the Root and Desg port.
VLAN0101
Spanning tree enabled protocol ieee
Root ID Priority 24677
Address 0017.e1d6.e111
Cost 4
Port 45 (GigabitEthernet0/45)
Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
Bridge ID Priority 32869 (priority 32768 sys-id-ext 101)
Address 001e.1494.4000
Hello Time 2 sec Max Age 20 sec Forward Delay 15 sec
Aging Time 300
Interface Role Sts Cost Prio.Nbr Type
---------------- ---- --- --------- -------- --------------------------------
Gi0/45 Root FWD 4 128.45 P2p
Gi0/46 Desg FWD 4 128.46 P2p
Any ideas?
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
