[sdnog] Links value to share "STP"

[Philip Paeps]

On 2016-01-20 08:33:41 (+0100), Sirag Mahgoob Sirag 
<sirag.mahgoob at sudren.edu.sd> wrote:
> Regarding to STP, Last week I asked to support some network engineers 
> to do some troubleshooting to their network which content more the 100 
> switchs including 2 core switches, the problem is there is some parts 
> in the network not working then suddenly back to work, after 
> investigation we found that all the problem due to the configure their 
> network without setting switch priority , for sure the network that 
> have all these switches will suffer from looping and the STP will take 
> place to work, and without focusing in setting priority any access 
> switch will be your network root and you will suffering from some 
> strange problems.
> SO, DONT LET STP PLAYING IN YOUR NETWORK AS IT WANT.

On any meaningful size network, implementing STP badly is probably just 
as bad as not having STP at all.  On the other hand, bridge loops will 
cripple a network instantly, while the effects of poorly implemented STP 
will take longer to manifest and (hopefully) be less painful to debug / 
repair.

Wherever possible, I would turn on STP by default.

Philip

-- 
Philip Paeps
Senior Reality Engineer
Ministry of Information