[c-nsp] Spanning-Tree vs. EoMPLS links in SXI2?

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 06:36:44PM +1000, David Hughes wrote:
> On 11/03/2010, at 7:33 AM, Gert Doering wrote:
> > Workaround:
> > Not to Send BPDU over EOMPLS.
>
> What a fantastic work around.  There's a bug that breaks STP so the 
> work around is not to use STP.  Pure genius.

*g*

Actually, this is along the lines of what I expected as one of the 
potential responses from this list - "don't build your redundancy on 
top of STP" (which is why I explained my setup in somewhat more detail).

There are good arguments for avoiding STP - and "less Cisco bugs to hit"
is certainly one of them... - but still, the workaround is definitely
worth quoting every now and then :-)

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 305 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/attachments/20100311/d29e4ab6/attachment.bin>