[f-nsp] mstp disable vs no spanning-tree

[Nick Hilliard]

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