Is Designing Networks Relying on STP Standard Practice?

[ribak31]

Is it standard practice to design networks that include reliance on STP for redundancy? I've recently inherited a network with a sizeable amount of loops and discovered STP blocking at least one interface on each switch I come across. The networks I had worked on or designed had always specifically avoided loops, and i treated STP as a failsafe in case someone made "whoopsie" connection. My interpretation of the current design is that the loops were intentionally added as redundant connections, and STP was relied on to keep them inactive unless the primary uplink failed. Is this normal in network design?

[balaji.bandi]

You can design correctly even though you have loops that should be ok, if not designed correctly the L2 loops create major network disruption in the network evetime the STP convergence take place 

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/lan-switching/spanning-tree-protocol/5234-5.html

[MHM Cisco World]

discovered STP blocking at least one interface on each switch I come across. !!!

That not correct' the stp BLK one link in all stp domain. Not need each SW have one blk interface.

This case of each sw have one blk is only when you have multi link between each sw and these multi.link not config as portchannel' so one of link is blk. And this not optimal design' you can use both link by config PO.

MHM