Re: [rbridge] Last Call: draft-ietf-trill-routing-reqs (TRILL RoutingRequirements in Support of RBridges) to Informational RFC

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote:
--On 20. mars 2007 09:35 -0700 Silvano Gai <sgai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 5) Introduction - Bridging limitation. The first paragraph refers to
 Ethernet networks used without Spanning Tree. This is irrelevant, since
 Spanning Tree is always deployed in conjunction with Ethernet. The
 correct contrast must be between Ethernet with Spanning Tree and
 Ethernet with TRILL. The claim of a single broadcast/flooding domain is
 incorrect since VLANs have solved this issue many years ago.

"always" is too strong, since most unmanaged bridges (intended for consumers' home networks, but often dangled off the edge of corporate networks as port expanders, without asking for permission) don't seem to be supporting Spanning Tree. However, these are not going to support TRILL either, so for the environments considered here, "always" is probably true.

FWIW, not sure if it matters, but our offices have a relatively small Ethernet network (50+ switches) and we have specifically disabled STP.

You can't run STP on host ports, and it's too much of a hassle to enable it on inter-switch ports, so it's easier to disable it everywhere.

--
Pekka Savola                 "You each name yourselves king, yet the
Netcore Oy                    kingdom bleeds."
Systems. Networks. Security. -- George R.R. Martin: A Clash of Kings

_______________________________________________

Ietf@xxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]