[nycbug-talk] Can RTSP and dumb switches coexist?
alex at pilosoft.com
Thu Oct 18 02:10:09 EDT 2007
On Thu, 18 Oct 2007, Jonathan Stewart wrote:
> As the subject asks based on what I have read so far (including chunks
> off the IEEE spec) it appears that RTSP can coexist with dumb switches
> as long as the dumb switches themselves don't form loops. Can someone
> confirm or refute this for me please.
a) I suppose you mean RSTP (rapid spanning tree protocol). RTSP is voip
b) dumb switches *must* comply with 802.1d (the STP protocol) anyway.
RSTP is backward compatible (theoretically), and it should (theoretically)
work fine, with loops or without.
c) the above being said, I encourage my competitors to rely on any
incarnation of STP to detect loops.
d) if above is too dense, explanation:
1) You *really* do not want loops in your l2 network. doubly so if you are
mixing STP protocols.
2) Unless you understand *exactly* how all variations of STP work, and how
they interact with each other, you *will* shoot yourself in the foot.
3) When STP breaks, it breaks in a very strange, and unstable ways, and
takes down your network completely. Troubleshooting it, when your network
is down, is not for weak-minded.
4) Just don't do it (tm). This is what happens when STP breaks:
5) Use layer 3 if you need redundancy (and loops).
The above being said, we (pilosoft) use STP/RSTP/PVST+/etc...But, the
thought about touching my configs makes hair raise on top of my head.
It'll be shortly ripped out and replaced with proper l3 stuff.
More information about the talk