[rbridge] MUST not send spanning tree BPDUs?

[Silvano Gai]

Agreed

-- Silvano

-----Original Message-----
From: rbridge-bounces at postel.org [mailto:rbridge-bounces at postel.org] On
Behalf Of Radia Perlman
Sent: Friday, November 28, 2008 9:37 PM
To: Donald Eastlake
Cc: rbridge at postel.org
Subject: Re: [rbridge] MUST not send spanning tree BPDUs?

Yeah. I think we should either drop the sentence, or say "MAY generate 
BPDUs,
but MUST NOT forward BPDUs from
one link to another".

Radia

Donald Eastlake wrote:
> Hi Radia,
>
> See below...
>
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 6:31 PM, Radia Perlman <Radia.Perlman at sun.com>
wrote:
>   
>> The spec currently says (in section 4.7.3.3 Transmission of BPDUs)
>>
>>  RBridges MAY support a capability for sending spanning tree BPDUs
for
>>   the purpose of attempting to force a bridged LAN to partition as
>>   discussed in Section A.3.3.  Except for this optional capability,
>>   RBridges MUST NOT send spanning tree BPDUs.
>>
>>
>> I don't remember any discussion on saying that RBridges MUST NOT send
>> BPDUs. I remember
>> at one point requiring it, and saying that an RBridge is DRB if and
only
>> if it is the Spanning tree Root.
>> (I still would prefer that, by the way -- makes all the controversial
>> per VLAN Hellos
>> unnecessary).
>>
>> I remember it being removed from the spec (because of complexity with
n
>> versions of
>> spanning tree, and links with no bridges, perhaps, where the spanning
>> tree messages would
>> be unnecessary overhead), but I don't remember any reason to say
>> RBridges MUST NOT sent
>> BPDUs.
>>     
>
> I suspect it used to say "do not" in the sense that there is no
> RBridge reason for an RBridge port to send spanning tree BPDUs except
> for the optional bridge LAN partitioning feature described in Section
> A.3.3. In some pass to upgrade to IETF implementation key words, it
> probably got changed when it didn't necessarily need to be. The only
> problem I can see with dropping this is that it might marginally
> increase the chance someone would erroneously try to build spanning
> trees through an RBridge.
>
> Donald
>
>   
>> Anyone else remember?
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Radia
>> _______________________________________________
>> rbridge mailing list
>> rbridge at postel.org
>> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
>>     
> =============================
>  Donald E. Eastlake 3rd   +1-508-634-2066 (home)
>  155 Beaver Street
>  Milford, MA 01757 USA
>  d3e3e3 at gmail.com
> _______________________________________________
> rbridge mailing list
> rbridge at postel.org
> http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge
>   

_______________________________________________
rbridge mailing list
rbridge at postel.org
http://mailman.postel.org/mailman/listinfo/rbridge