I am in the process of cascading several 3560 switches together back to our 6500 core, and want the traffic to flow "up", rather than allowing spanning tree to choose the bottom switch to go "down" back to our core. I have modified both path cost and priority, albeit not together, and have yet to get the "bottom Gig0/2" interface to go into blocking. Below is a graph of how traffic currently flows:
I assume when you mean routing, you say layer 3. This is all layer 2, using the spanning tree protocol.
Also, convergence is not my primary objective. I want to get all the traffic flowing the same direction back to the core, instead of allowing the switches to pick the best route. Even though from Switch 3560-C the best route is to go 'down' back to the Core, I want traffic initially to flow through switches A and B.
Question We run asr9001 with XR 6.1.3, and we have a very long delay to
login w/ SSH 1 or 2 to the device compare to IOS device. After
investigation, the there is 1s delay between the client KEXDH_INIT and
the server (XR) KEXDH_REPLY. After debug ssh serv...
Introduction The purpose of this document is to demonstrate the Open
Shortest Path First (OSPF) behavior when the V-bit (Virtual-link bit) is
present in a non-backbone area. The V-bit is signaled in Type-1 LSA only
if the router is the endpoint of one or ...
Hi, I am seeing quite a few issues with patch install and wanted to
share my experience and workaround to this. Login to admin via CLI, then
access root with the “shell” command Issue “df –h” and you’ll probably
see the following directory full or nearly ...