Trunk port with Spanning Tree

[Aravind002]

If one of the port configured as Trunk was blocked by Spanning-Tree, does this will make the roles of other trunk ports as blocked/disabled? I read about this in HP's website and it doesn't make any sense because if all ports in the switch are configured as trunk, according to the above information, roles of every ports in this switch will become blocked/disabled, this will create whole lot of other problems in our network.

My CML license is expired and my company's lab is down. So, I was not be able to perform any testing on this. I will really appreciate if anyone out there, perform a testing on this and provide your outputs as screenshots to me. If testing is not possible, please feel free to provide your comments on this which will be helpful for me as well.

[MHM Cisco World]

Not sense at all'

Can you share link of hp I need to read it.

MHM

[M02@rt37]

Hello @Aravind002 

If one port configured as a trunk is blocked by spanning-tree, it does not necessarily mean that all trunk ports on the switch will be blocked. The spanning-tree algorithm operates independently on each VLAN, and ports are blocked or unblocked based on their role in the spanning-tree topology.

If all ports on a switch are configured as trunk ports and they are in the same VLAN, spanning-tree might indeed block redundant trunks to prevent loops. However, this would only happen if there are redundant paths in the network, and spanning-tree is doing its job to ensure a loop-free topology.

If you have multiple VLANs and each trunk port is in a different VLAN, spanning-tree operates independently for each VLAN. Therefore, blocking a trunk port in one VLAN won't necessarily impact trunk ports in other VLANs.

[Joseph W. Doherty]

What I suspect might be the cause of confusion, Cisco provides a proprietary per VLAN STP while HP's STP might be true standard STP, the latter per port.

BTW, the standard way to do per VLAN STP is to use MST, which Cisco also supports.