 |
 |
We mix vendors a lot including on the Minneapolis wifi network using MST and rstp. So literally thousands of bridges talking, more or less, faithfully. Sure some bugs exist but when facing adversity one must adapt or flounder (Darwinism?). Getting vendors to fix bugs helps immensely too of course. And yes convergence is faster than vanilla STP. Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile -----Original Message----- From: Richard Laager <[log in to unmask]> Sender: MICE Discuss <[log in to unmask]> Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2011 19:08:52 To: <[log in to unmask]> Reply-To: MICE Discuss <[log in to unmask]> Subject: Re: [MICE-DISCUSS] Remote MICE members? On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 17:01 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: > On Sep 20, 2011, at 4:57 PM, Richard Laager wrote: > > > On Tue, 2011-09-20 at 15:13 -0700, Owen DeLong wrote: > >> Unfortunately, fast converging spanning tree tends to be vendor-specific. > > > > RSTP and MSTP are both standards. Aren't they fast enough? > > > > If you have two vendors with compatible implementations of them, perhaps. Admittedly, it's > been a while, but, last time I tried, the interoperability across multiple vendors wasn't there > once you departed from normal 90-second spanning tree. I haven't had any cross-vendor problems, even mixing RSTP and MSTP (in configurations for which they are designed to mix). I'm about to add another vendor to the mix, so we'll see if this blows up in my face now that I've publicly said it's been working. ;) Richard ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1 ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the MICE-DISCUSS list, click the following link: http://lists.iphouse.net/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=MICE-DISCUSS&A=1