You truly are a gem Keith

@KeithBarker

2 жыл бұрын

Happy to do it, thanks for the feedback jay sejpal.

You're one of the best instructors Keith, im so thankful for your guidance. It's like everything makes sense when you explain it

@KeithBarker

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you sunriser2020!

Finally I understood STP. Thanks Keith....stay blessed

@KeithBarker

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you Thomas Lindh!

Keith, Thanks for making it easy in explaining STP! I should say you are one of the few born to teach!

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you Birara! That is very kind. Glad you are here.

I've watch videos about cisco networks and this is the best. For real! Thank you so much for this.

@KeithBarker

Жыл бұрын

You're very welcome!

Thanks M.R Barker for making the videos, I'm Learning English and Networking at the same time with you. Thank you very much

@KeithBarker

3 жыл бұрын

Very good!

Thanks for making this great content available.

@KeithBarker

3 жыл бұрын

Glad you enjoy it!

Thanks Keith for brilliant session finished it now 👍

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Awesome! Thank you Darshan.

The best!!! this very difficult concept for me, just made easy. Explained very clear. Thank you.

@KeithBarker

2 жыл бұрын

You're very welcome!

I didn't know that u can modify the root bridge of the switch and use it for load balancing purposes. Thank you keith

Great content

Thank you. Clear and perfect.

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Awesome! Thank you Hugues!

Thank you Keith.

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Happy to do it, thanks for the feedback Michael He.

Thank You very much!

Keith you are making this so simple and take the fear away. You are the one I need to follow to get my Cisco Certs. Hope we can chat and get this on the road. Waiting 35 years of distraction is no excuse. I have suffered too long to get this,

@KeithBarker

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you G. BadrichIndian It is your time now, go get it. I believe you can do it. I am here to help.

@gbadri1

3 жыл бұрын

Keith Barker hey Mr.Barker it is an honour and privileged to have someone like you to take time off your busy, well extra busy schedule to reach out to us with genuinely cares and it shows in your teachings. If we can chat at your convenience it would mean a lot. I am so hooked on your CCNA courses I forget I am watching TV. I am reading up on packet tracer and using your bearded buddy classes also. Sincerely thanks Mr. Barker. Good night and be well. From Nevada, with 7 children, you knocked me out of my lot -5. Talk to you soon Sir.

Merci khoya Keith , very clear explanation about vlan Load balancing

@KeithBarker

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you YOUSSEF EDDAIF!

Really informative ❤❤

Thank you!! That was very helpful!

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

So glad!

great information thanks!

@KeithBarker

3 жыл бұрын

You bet!

Great Video, I think many beginners do not now that PC2 is representing a server. I mean In the real scenario why we do that load balancing. We do not want to have one single paths to the server. Many thanks Keith you are amazing instructor.

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you Karwan Saed!

Thanks

Awesome😃

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you! Cheers!

This video had me adding all sort of information to my netacad notes , mainly, Cisco never even mentions the load balancing . Cisco just states that any ios running 15 or higher runs PVST , and leaves it at that . They didnt even mention load balancing as a feature of pvst. Thank you for illustrating that it is! @27:00 But now this video has raised my curiosity on a bottle neck you formed, with all the VLANs using the 1/1 link between Switches 4&5. What could we do to have path B use 2/2?

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the comments Pauly-Wauly Doodlealdaday. To tweak STP, you can change the root, per VLAN, and you can also modify interface costs and priorities. Those are the tools that could be used to control which traffic flows where.

Q1: - why would anyone design a network like this in production ??? - what layer of the network would this be configured for ??? - can you show per-vlan-stp & per-vlan-rstp /w 2 core, 4 distribution and 8 access switches, /w backup links ???

Adjusting The interface prio for sw5 due to the double link would be a good second exercise in this scenario

@KeithBarker

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you Bernd Eckenfels!

@Ramazan_Durak

7 ай бұрын

yeah i was expecting that too but i guess it is covered in upcoming videos on the playlist :) which i enjoy following! thank you keith! let me get to the next!

"I have a pen and I'm not afraid of using it" "If it didn't work, we'll turn this into a troubleshooting exercise" Keith should be protected at all costs...

@KeithBarker

4 ай бұрын

Thank you @RSPodcast44!

Please help i don't want to miss such session I'm totally addicted your session

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Awesome! Thank you Vaibhav! All the recordings are in this playlist: ogit.onlin/sloth See you next time.

Setting a second switch with the next lowest bridge ID is probably important if the primary goes down. This shouldnt be left to chance else you might get the oldest switch becoming elected and your network will crawl (When new switches come along the Mac addresses are higher than the older switches this would definately come into play if the bridge ID's are the same and have been left to chance)

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you Melvin.

@keith Barker Instead of making a root bridge for VLAN 20 , i believe we can even tweak the cost at interface for particular VLAN too for load balancing the vlan's correct me if i am wrong

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the question Anand Sekar. Yes, by playing with costs at interfaces we can perform manipulation for many of the ports involved, to some degree.

Just out of curiosity. In regards to your verification process. Wouldn't the MAC address of the source be seen on all receiving interfaces that are not being blocked due to a broadcast? So you would technically see the sources MAC address on port 1/3 on SW 3 in Path A, and the source MAC Address on port 2/0 on SW 2 in Path B? Is it then possible to clear that entry in the MAC Address Table for those ports, try the ping again, and actually verify that the MAC Address from the source did NOT actually get registered in the MAC Address Table of the interfaces above? I know it's taking the verification one step further, but I'm just wondering if that's even possible. Your videos are awesome by the way. I'm 25, working in the "cloud" infrastructure field, and a few months ago realized that Networking is something that I really want to pursue as my career progresses. Thank you so much for taking the time out of your day, to provide amazing content and education without me having to spend a penny.

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the idea Troy. You are correct. And if the mac address tables were cleared, and the future traffic was unicast, that source mac address would only show up on the ports in the path. Great insight, spot on! Appreciate you watching, and for your thoughts.

Where learning about this in class atm

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Awesome! Glad you are here.

Do you have a video that explains how to build this topology in packet tracer?

@KeithBarker

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the question Derrik Bosse. kzread.info/head/PLQQoSBmrXmrxDECc1N9BPYdjS8z0sbCwk

can also use : spanning-tree vlan 20 priority 0 or primary 0 ?

@KeithBarker

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the question S L. Yes, and 0 is the best (lowest) priority value. If we had multiple switches with priority 0, then it would be the lowest of the base mac addresses to decide on who will be the root bridge.

Keith, when a interface has been blocked, what is it blocking, incoming traffic or outgoing traffic & will a blocked interface block broadcast ?

@KeithBarker

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you Niranjan Rajan. Feel free to join my Discord sever. Lots of people there helping each other out. Each Saturday at 10am Pacific I hold my "Office Hour" where learners can ask questions about the topics they are studying. Mostly focusing on Cisco CCNA 200-301 topics. Feel free to join us there live if you are available. Here is the link ogit.online/Join_OGIT_on_Discord Thanks again Niranjan Rajan!

Hi Keith, How old were you when you got your first Cisco certification?

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the question Robinson Saez. I was born in 64, first Cisco cert was in 1999. So I guess I was 35ish.

@emanc93

4 жыл бұрын

@@KeithBarker You are timeless, Keith

small topology a lot going on... messy when you have 10 plus switces

Sorry to be late , i have to say great videos , but i don't get, why on switch 3 and switch 4, port 2/3 is block should not be D.P. because the BIT of SW4 is lower than SW3 ? Could any body help i wach 3 times the videos about STP but i dont get it ?

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you for the question pablo guzman. Join us on Discord server after one of the premiers, and we can walk you through why that in spanning tree.

@teamhhh1

4 жыл бұрын

Yess

Can someone please help me understand why in the first diagram Sw4 is blocking between Sw4 and SW3? SW4 has the lower mac address between itself and SW3. So why isnt it forwarding and SW3 blocking on the link between them? Thanks in advance to whom ever can help!

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Happy to do it, thanks for the question Triston. In the first diagram, SW1 is the root bridge. SW2 and SW3 both have the same cost (4 over gig) to get to the root. S4 chooses a root port, based on the lowest cost to get to the root. The cost through SW2 and Sw3 are the same cost. SW4 then chooses the advertising switch that has the lowest bridge ID. SW2 has a base MAC address that is lower than SW3, and SW2 and SW3 are using the default priority. As a result, SW2 has a lower and better bridge ID than SW3, so SW4 chooses its one and only root port to be 3/1. On the segment between S3 and S4, there can only be 1 designated port, and the switch with the lowest cost to get to the root is going to win (SW3). As a result, SW4 blocks on port 2/3. Hope that helps, and thanks for the question.

@godfodda

4 жыл бұрын

@@KeithBarker Thanks so much for the reply! And thank you for all the content that you put out. You don't know how much the community appreciates it.

This video on the playlist shows as an hour and a half but only 30 minutes when i watch it?

Keith the BLK Port Between SW3 and SW4 should be SW2 2/2

Hey Keith, I want to have a discussion on STP for the below topology as shown below. SW1(0/1)-------TRUNK FOR VLAN 10,20------(0/1)SW2 SW1(0/2)-------TRUNK FOR VLAN 30,40------(0/2)SW2 Consider, we are running classic STP or MST with single instance for all these VLAN 10,20,30,40. As shown above only specific VLANs are allowed in the respective trunk interfaces. Actually there is no loop at all in the topology. But if enable STP or MST with those VLANs in single instance, the STP will block one of the port. Is that correct?. In this case 0/2 of SW2. If we run PVSTP or MSTP with 2 instances (one having 10,20 & another having 30&40), STP will not block any ports at all. Also even we are not running any STP also, There will not any loop right. Does my observation make sense. Any addons and comments on top of this?

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thanks for the question. In the first scenario with 1 instance of STP, yes there would be blocking on 1 port. Which switch would be blocking on a port depends on which device is the root bridge. For the second scenario, with instance 1 used for VLANs 10 and 20, and instance 2 used for VLANs 30 and 40, with the top link allowing only 10,20 and the bottom link allowing only 30,40, you are right, STP would not be blocking on any of these ports at all, and there would be no loop. Nice work.

@SelvaKumarSel

4 жыл бұрын

@@KeithBarker Thanks Keith🙏 for your kind reply. Appreciated 🤝. And even if we are not running any STP in the switch, there will not be any loop at all as we allowed only specific VLANs in the trunk. Is that correct.

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

@@SelvaKumarSel In that second scenario, with no loops and no blocking, yes. If STP wasn't running there still would no loops.

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

@@SelvaKumarSel In that second scenario, with no loops and no blocking, yes. If STP wasn't running there still would no loops.

@SelvaKumarSel

4 жыл бұрын

@@KeithBarker Thanks Keith 🤝

What is this??? I just get a black youtube screen and video not playing, tried on FF and Opera.

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Video should be available now.

Sorry. I'm late to the party. 3 years late. If you wanted to further load balance between switch 4 and 5, Would you want to lower the port priority for certain vlans on port 2/2 coming off switch 4?

@KeithBarker

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for the question Terry Williams. The easiest and most elegant option for load-balancing between SW4 and SW5 would be LACP and a Link Aggregation Group (LAG). In Cisco, this would be called an Etherchannel.

why sw3 - 2/2 is designated port and sw4 - 2/3 in blocking since sw4 mac address is lower than sw3 Please someone explain

@KeithBarker

3 жыл бұрын

Thank you Mohamed Qasim. Feel free to join my Discord sever. Lots of people there helping each other out. Each Saturday at 10am Pacific I hold my "Office Hour" where learners can ask questions about the topics they are studying. Mostly focusing on Cisco CCNA 200-301 topics. Feel free to join us there live if you are available. Here is the link ogit.online/Join_OGIT_on_Discord Thanks again Mohamed Qasim!

The video is not available but numbers of viewers has been increasing, guys who are viewing how are you doing ???

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Video should be available now.

It's showing - This video is unavailable on this device. Please help

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Thank you Vaibhav! I did some edits, and KZread had to process them. Sorry for the hiccup. Video should be available now.

@vaibhavkhartode1030

4 жыл бұрын

@@KeithBarker sir it is available now ....You are great mentor . I am eagerly waiting for your session it gives me motivation , fun and your love to learn small and big concept of networking ... God gave you more power to learn more. I'm form Mumbai (India) i would like to meet you in future .

The video is not available 🧐😕

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Video should be available now.

Video is unavailable

@KeithBarker

4 жыл бұрын

Video should be available now.

7:15 is it the lowest bridge ID or the lowetneighbor bridge ID ? I thought it is the lowest neighbor bridge ID! please if anyone knows let me know

If none of your forwarding links were not heavily loaded at what point do you think the added complexity is not worth it? Buy one switch with a fast cpu and let it be the root? Less to troubleshoot when something goes wrong. Just starting in networking any ideas?

@KeithBarker

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you Jeffrey Pelaske. Feel free to join my Discord sever. Lots of people there helping each other out. Each Saturday at 10am Pacific I hold my "Office Hour" where learners can ask questions about the topics they are studying. Mostly focusing on Cisco CCNA 200-301 topics. Feel free to join us there live if you are available. Here is the link ogit.online/Join_OGIT_on_Discord Thanks again Jeffrey Pelaske!

Is this showing as an hour and 50 min in the thumbnail preview but only actually 34 min when you click on it for anyone else?

@eb.pro22

2 жыл бұрын

Just found the answer to this in the next video in this playlist! The extra time showing in the thumbnail is from the QA from the live stream, which is cut out before final upload...for some reason KZread still shows the total time of the video in the thumbnail but you are not missing any information in the actual lesson just the Q&A from the live stream! (Just incase anyone else was wondering!)

@KeithBarker

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you Eben D'Agostino for finding that answer and posting it for us. Happy studies!

Sw3