[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: ifconfig delay on up
>> Sometimes, disabling it _is_ the right answer
When its costs outweigh its benefits, of course.
My house LAN is an example.
- Noise packets (mostly output clutter when I tcpdump).
- Problems like the one that started this thread.
- One more piece of code running.
- If I ever end up with a multi-switch topology, _and_ accidentally
create a loop, _and_ fail to notice the resulting packet storm
immediately, it may hide my mistakes from myself.
...actually, I think _zero_ costs would outweigh those benefits. If I
make a mistake like that, I'd much rather the network broke promptly
and dramatically. (If I deliberately set up a loopy/redundant
topology, I can turn spanning tree on. I'm not talking about being
_capable_ of spanning tree; I'm talking about leaving it on in a case
like my house LAN.)
> Switched networks should be running an stp, period.
Anyone who thinks one answer fits all situations needs a reality check.
> IMHO anyone who thinks sometimes it is right to turn spanning tree
> off, needs this advice.
I think you need to look up what the H stands for in "IMHO".
I note switch vendors - who presumably know more about the breadth of
variety of applications their equipment is put to than anyone else -
agree with me on this point, in that they do make it possible to turn
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Main Index |
Thread Index |