Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements

Welcome to Cisco Support Community. We would love to have your feedback.

For an introduction to the new site, click here. If you'd prefer to explore, try our test area to get started. And see here for current known issues.

New Member

spanning tree question - blocked port

Hello everyone,  thanks in advance for any help you can give me.

I have a new site with a 6509 switch.  It is connected back to my main site by two P2P layer two trunks.  I have to trunk VLANs between the two sites for about six weeks until I get all of the equipment moved.  At that time I wil change them to layre 3 routed links.

When I connect one trunk no problem.  When I connect the second,  spanning tree blocks the first.

What is the best method to allow two layer two trunks to connect between the same two switches?

  • LAN Switching and Routing
Everyone's tags (4)
1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

spanning tree question - blocked port

Hi,

Did you think about port channeling (ether channel) both links? That might help you.

Thx

MS

6 REPLIES

spanning tree question - blocked port

Hi,

Did you think about port channeling (ether channel) both links? That might help you.

Thx

MS

New Member

spanning tree question - blocked port

Thank you to everyone that replied.  I am going to attempt the etherchannel solution.

Re: spanning tree question - blocked port

Hello,

Spanning-tree is meant to avoid loops and with those two interfaces running between the two switches, one of them needs to be blocked to break the loop.

As MS correctly stated, you might want to think of port-channeling these two interfaces. This causes spanning-tree to look at the bundle as one logical link and the bundle interface would itself be forwarding, allowing traffic to go over both the individual interfaces based on your hashing algorithm.

Regards,

Aninda

Super Bronze

Re: spanning tree question - blocked port

Disclaimer

The  Author of this posting offers the information contained within this  posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that  there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose.  Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not  be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this  posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.

Liability Disclaimer

In  no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including,  without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out  of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author  has been advised of the possibility of such damage.

Posting

As the other poster has suggest, port-channel might be your best option (you can also use if for L3 when no longer have a need for the trunk).

Second best option (if doable), might be to vary cost of different VLANs on the two trunks.  With per-vlan-stp, you would block half your VLANs on each trunk.

Re: spanning tree question - blocked port

Hi Joseph

Second best option (if doable), might be to vary cost of different VLANs on the two trunks.  With per-vlan-stp, you would block half your VLANs on each trunk.

That's actually a very good suggestion considering the scenario. It makes sense to try and load-balance across the two trunks if a port-channel is not doable.

Regards,

Aninda

spanning tree question - blocked port

Spanning Tree blocks will port one port because its creating loop in network.

if u want two ports should be used.  U can make ether channel and bind two ports in that channel because

  STP sees etherchannel as a single port

Jawad

Jawad
250
Views
10
Helpful
6
Replies