[119298] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Layer 2 vs. Layer 3 to TOR
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Coulson)
Thu Nov 12 16:12:26 2009
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 16:09:18 -0500
From: David Coulson <david@davidcoulson.net>
To: Raj Singh <raj.singh@demandmedia.com>
In-Reply-To: <6CDE22DE80A63A4DACF4FE2C916519A53F4E63E3DD@BLV11EXVS01.corp.dm.local>
Cc: "nanog@nanog.org" <nanog@nanog.org>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
Raj Singh wrote:
> We are actually looking at going Layer 3 all the way to the top of rack and make each rack its own /24. This provides us flexibility when doing maintenance (spanning-tree). Also, troubleshooting during outages is much easier by using common tools like ping and trace routes.
I'm confused where STP fits into this. If you're doing /24s to each
switch, why even bring STP into the picture? Do /31s to each TOR switch
and use OSPF or ISIS. I don't know too many people who have not had an
awful experience with STP at some point.
