[Beowulf] Spanning Tree Protocol and latency: allowing loops in switching networks for minimizing switch hops
Many of your questions may have already been answered in earlier discussions or in the FAQ. The search results page will indicate current discussions as well as past list serves, articles, and papers.
Rahul Nabar rpnabar at gmail.comTue Feb 23 13:15:28 PST 2010
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Spanning Tree Protocol and latency: allowing loops in switching networks for minimizing switch hops
- Next message: [Beowulf] Spanning Tree Protocol and latency: allowing loops in switching networks for minimizing switch hops
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Greg Lindahl <lindahl at pbm.com> wrote: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 01:23:59PM -0600, Rahul Nabar wrote: > >> In the interest of latency minimum switch hops make sense and for that >> loops might sometimes provide the best solution. > > STP disables all loops. All you gain is a bit of redundancy, but the > price is high. I see! That makes sense. Too bad. I wish there was some non-STP way of dealing with loops then. -- Rahul
- Previous message: [Beowulf] Spanning Tree Protocol and latency: allowing loops in switching networks for minimizing switch hops
- Next message: [Beowulf] Spanning Tree Protocol and latency: allowing loops in switching networks for minimizing switch hops
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Beowulf mailing list