[c-nsp] Pros/Cons to *disabling* mac-address aging-time <> "routed-mac"

[Chris Evans]

Leave it on. There are reasons for it that I don't have at home with me. But
its needed for span and other things to stop unicast flooding.
On Aug 16, 2011 12:03 AM, "Randy" <randy_94108 at yahoo.com> wrote:
> I have inherited a setup:
> - cat6509E's running IOS: various flavors for SXF. In the process of
upgrading to a standard-flavor of SXI4a.
>
> I see that all 650x have mac-address-table aging-time <> "routed-mac"
enabled by default.
> There is a fair amount of inter-SVI communication that happens but it is
within the same switch.
>
> I am thinking:
>
> Turning-off(mac-address aging-time 0 routed-mac) can only help but won't
hurt!
>
> Any thoughts/experiences wrt to above would be appreciated.
> Thanks,
> ./Randy
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/