Well all my VTP stories end in tears. Most STP stories tend to end there too. Sigh...oh! well if it works it works right?:-)

Sent from my iPad

On 27 Feb 2012, at 12:46, jim ndegwa <ndegwajim@yahoo.com> wrote:

my experience with vtp on a large govt deployment was excellent (lots of access switches and two 6509 Core). Proper documentation does help of course. Challenge is that we techies dislike write-ups after project completion


From: Mark Tinka <mtinka@globaltransit.net>
To: eanog@lists.my.co.ke
Cc: John Gitau <jgitau@gmail.com>; jim ndegwa <ndegwajim@yahoo.com>; SkunkworksMailing List <skunkworks@lists.my.co.ke>
Sent: Monday, February 27, 2012 11:34 AM
Subject: Re: [EANOG] [Skunkworks] STP convergence & MST

On Monday, February 27, 2012 03:51:15 PM John Gitau wrote:

> -Disable vtp. Prune manually. 60 is not a large number.
> Just for comparison for one segment of our network we
> have well over 7000 Vlans and yes stp/vtp are disabled.
> We planned it that way.

Sage advice.

VTP is evil.

> -Even if you choose to go L3 end
> to end. I wouldn't advocate for a total stp shutdown as
> has been advised unless you are very sure no one can
> attach a random switch or other bpdu generating device.
> You can start planning the transition though.

If STP is mainly used core-facing, I'd suggest disabling it
there, for those who are running an IP/MPLS Access and
Aggregation network.

Of course, continuining to have STP and/or BPDU filtering on
customer-facing ports is highly advised.

We block Edge ports that receive BPDU's, and we've been
happy. Pain of one customer is better than pain of many :-).

Mark.