Hi All, Might be a dumb response, but what about REP? http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/switches/lan/catalyst3560/software/rele ase/15-0_2_se/configuration/guide/scg3560/swrep.html
seems legit??? Ciao JC -----Original Message----- From: cisco-nsp [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Victor Sudakov Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2014 12:40 PM To: Antonio Soares Cc: 'cisco-nsp' Subject: Re: [c-nsp] Divide large PVST domain? Antonio Soares wrote: > > > > I have a train of about 20 C3560X switches connected successively. > > I know such a diameter is not good for STP, however, when I place > > the root bridge in the middle of the train, PVST still works more or less reliably. > > > > However, if I wanted to divide this single STP domain into several > > smaller ones, which way is best? > > > > I can define three geographical areas between which no loop is > > physically possible and which cannot have any redundant links between one another. > > > > Should I just configure a bpdufilter on the border switches to > > separate the areas, or is there a smarter way, maybe going for MST instead of PVST? > MST is the way to go. It was designed with that in mind. Check this: > > http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/spanning-tree- > protocol/24248-147.html "Cisco recommends that you place as many switches as possible into a single region; it is not advantageous to segment a network into separate regions" I wonder if MST has any limits on the network diameter. -- Victor Sudakov, VAS4-RIPE, VAS47-RIPN sip:[email protected] _______________________________________________ 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/
