similar to: (OT) Phones with STP, DHCP, and/or (T)FTP Issues

I've got a run of Shielded Twisted Pair (4 conductors) which used to be a Token Ring Network drop and I'm not using it anymore. Would it be decent to replace the ends with normal analog phone connectors and use it for a phone extension, or is STP unsuitable for that? Thanks Steve

Hello! "brctl stp br0" would crash brctl provided that br0 is a bridge. This is caused by incorrect number of arguments in the commands table. "stp" needs at least 2 arguments after "stp". The patch against version 1.0.4 is attached. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin -------------- next part -------------- --- brctl/brctl_cmd.c +++ brctl/brctl_cmd.c @@ -394,7 +394,7 @@

I have noticed a change in the linux bridge implementation between 2.1.15 and 2.1.17. Specifically, I do not think BPDU's (generated from another bridge) are passed across the bridge when STP is disabled. I think this relates to the LLC handling of BPDU's directly invoking br_bpdu_rcv. In 2.6.15, the br_handle_frame function would pass a BPDU to the br_handle_frame_finish function

Hello: Have a TE110P laying around and decided to see if I could build a router around it. I've tried compiling several versions of zaptel .1.4.x with the same results. I checked the zaptel changelog and can't find anything about it no longer being supported (or that it ever was for that matter). ztcfg: Zaptel Configuration SPAN 1: CCS/HDB3 Build-out: 0 db (CSU)/0-133 feet (DSX-1)

On 16.09.2015 12:18, C.L. Martinez wrote: > On 09/16/2015 10:15 AM, Dmitry E. Mikhailov wrote: >> On 09/16/2015 03:02 PM, C.L. Martinez wrote: >>> What advantages and disadvantages have?? If I will want to install >>> some kvm guests that use multicast address for certain services, is it >>> recommended to enable STP? >> STP has nothing to do with

It appears that interfaces participate in STP's forwarding delay even when STP is disabled for a given bridge. I can remedy by setting the FD to 0 for each new bridge, but I'm wondering if this is by design or oversight. [root@ ~]# brctl show bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces br0.690 8000.00065b8bce3e no eth1.690

Hi all, We are facing a problem with STP implementation. We have only 2 switches. Thats the constraint, but we feel STP should work. Background: We have developed a layer 2 switch. This uses Cirrus logic's ep9301 processor, embedded Linux 2.4.21 kernel as the OS and zarlink's switch controller. The observation: 1)we have 2 switches, switch A and switch B 2)port 1 and port 2 of switch

On 12/07/2023 02:54, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: > When we create an L2 loop on a bridge in netns, we will see packets storm > even if STP is enabled. > > # unshare -n > # ip link add br0 type bridge > # ip link add veth0 type veth peer name veth1 > # ip link set veth0 master br0 up > # ip link set veth1 master br0 up > # ip link set br0 type bridge stp_state 1

On 09/16/2015 10:15 AM, Dmitry E. Mikhailov wrote: > On 09/16/2015 03:02 PM, C.L. Martinez wrote: >> What advantages and disadvantages have?? If I will want to install >> some kvm guests that use multicast address for certain services, is it >> recommended to enable STP? > STP has nothing to do with multicast as it's an Ethernet protocol. > It's developed to

Hello, when talking about networking in hypervisors, it's easy to distinguish the two classic configurations, NAT and bridged, and the official libvirt wiki does exactly in this way here [1]. NAT networking is already configured by libvirt creating a bridge called libvirt0, while bridged networking have to be configured manually by the user. The libvirt0 bridge for NAT networking is default

Hi, All: I am tring to use STP function on bridge device that refer the BRIDGE-STP-HOWTO. And I use PING program to test it from PC1 to PC2. But the forward function is become too long when bridge topology change. How can I tuning the STP to make client connect to another again faster? I have been use follow command. But it seen not this issue. Bcause, if I run " arp -d " on

On 09/16/2015 03:02 PM, C.L. Martinez wrote: > What advantages and disadvantages have?? If I will want to install > some kvm guests that use multicast address for certain services, is it > recommended to enable STP? STP has nothing to do with multicast as it's an Ethernet protocol. It's developed to provide loop-free redundancy links to Ethernet-based networks. I can't

I am doing some testing of openwrt'd wireless access points, using madwifi-ng'd atheros radios. In the test configuration, I have three devices in a triangle, each has wds links to the other two devices. The ath0 interface is in ap mode, ath1 is a wds link to one device, and ath2 is a wds link to the other device. All three interfaces (and an ethernet interface) are in a bridge (br-lan)

When we create an L2 loop on a bridge in netns, we will see packets storm even if STP is enabled. # unshare -n # ip link add br0 type bridge # ip link add veth0 type veth peer name veth1 # ip link set veth0 master br0 up # ip link set veth1 master br0 up # ip link set br0 type bridge stp_state 1 # ip link set br0 up # sleep 30 # ip -s link show br0 2: br0:

On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 15:58:49 -0700 Brian Braunstein <brian@bristyle.com> wrote: > hi stephen and tony, > > i have been in contact with both of you and i figured it would make > sense to get you to in contact on this issue, so here's the story: > > stephen is the maintainer of the linux spanning tree bridging code, an > implementation of 802.1D-1998 that has very

(CC'ing bridge maintainers.) Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu at amazon.com> writes: > From: Harry Coin <hcoin at quietfountain.com> > Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 16:40:03 -0500 >> On 7/11/23 15:44, Andrew Lunn wrote: >> >>>>>> The current llc_rcv.c around line 166 in net/llc/llc_input.c has >> >>>>>> >>

ast_waitfordigit that accepts milliseconds as input. Douglas Garstang wrote: > Admittedly I have not used the ExternalIVR app. Is it any good? > > I'm not sure I agree that Asterisk is GOOD for building IVR's. Sure, > it can do it, but boy it is UGLY. There's also the fact that you can't > call Backgound() in a macro, which forces you to use Read() which >

hot to asterisk multiport...??? example 5060, 5061, 5080 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-users/attachments/20070815/8a515309/attachment.htm

Hi all, Reading docs about using bridges in a KVM environment, I have a doubt about activating STP or not in a KVM host. What advantages and disadvantages have?? If I will want to install some kvm guests that use multicast address for certain services, is it recommended to enable STP? Thanks.

On 12/07/2023 17:48, Ido Schimmel wrote: > On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 04:54:15PM -0700, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote: >> When we create an L2 loop on a bridge in netns, we will see packets storm >> even if STP is enabled. >> >> # unshare -n >> # ip link add br0 type bridge >> # ip link add veth0 type veth peer name veth1 >> # ip link set veth0 master