On 07/02/2013 15:45, Steven Raymond wrote: > On Feb 6, 2013, at 3:58 PM, Nick Hilliard wrote: >> no spanning-tree at the vlan level completely stops all varieties of >> multi-vlan STP for that VLAN. > > Do you mean Cisco PVST? Or MSTP?
All flavours of STP. >> stp-protect causes inbound bpdus to be dropped and counted, and stops stp >> negotiation from happening on the port, but as fas I remember, the port >> will still be part of the spanning tree topology. > > What is the the purpose for remaining part of the topology while not > exchanging BPDUs? Does that offer some advantage over "no > spanning-tree"? It's been too long since I've looked at that to give you a clear answer. "no spanning-tree" does the right thing for my configurations, so that's what I use. Nick _______________________________________________ foundry-nsp mailing list [email protected] http://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/foundry-nsp
