Extreme Network Switches offer better features than Cisco?

---

I have worked in IT for years, and I am still learning every day. There may be a simple explanation to my question that I am overlooking. A salesman of Extreme switches told me that Extreme switches do not use spanning-tree. Extreme switches have a proprietary protocol that automatically optimizes switch connectivity by default; just connect the switch. I am referring to switches in different parts of the building. By using extreme switches, I do not have to worry about manually configuring a root bridge for any reason.

I know that a root bridge using spanning-tree is automatically selected using the Bridge ID. If the Bridge ID is the same, the lowest MAC address determines the root bridge. I may want to change my root bridge to improve network performance. I can change the root bridge on a Cisco switch by using #spanning-tree vlan 10 priority 16384 or #spanning-tree vlan 2 root primary.

I cannot find any information on this Extreme technology that beats out Cisco. What am I missing? Extreme features include STP, RSTP & MSTP. Cisco offers the same spanning-tree modes, including the Cisco enhanced version of RSTP (Rapid PVST+).

After searching, I found that a network admin recommended turning off spanning-tree mode on Extreme Switches (the default) and using MLAG instead. MLAG is a feature I would use if my switches were in the same rack. MLAG would be a consideration against using switch stacking or LACP.

What am I missing where several people tell me that Extreme Switches is the exclusive company that possesses this feature to optimize my network?

@donald-muncy said in Extreme Network Switches offer better features than Cisco?:

What am I missing where several people tell me that Extreme Switches is the exclusive company that possesses this feature to optimize my network?

I'm not exactly sure about the exclusivity of MLAG to Extreme. MLAG is used across multiple vendors, including Cisco but implemented by different names across those vendors too. Eg.,

Cisco Catalyst 6500 - VSS Multichassis Etherchannel (MEC)
Cisco Catalyst 3750 (and similar) - Cross-Stack EtherChannel
Cisco Catalyst 9000 - StackWise Virtual
Cisco Nexus - Virtual PortChannel (vPC), where a PortChannel is a regular LAG
Cisco IOS-XR - mLACP

So what this may let us know is that even though the technology is not exclusive but each vendor's implementation is different. Maybe that is what is being referenced.

Thanks for helping me understand Ronnie.

Is MLAG the feature that some people may be referring to as replacing spanning-tree?

If MLAG is the technology be referenced, I would think the same claim would made to replace spanning-tree with port aggregation methods such as using PAGP or LACP. I do not consider LACP or PAGP as being candidates to replacing spanning-tree.

Should I be considering disabling spanning-tree?
Speaking of spanning tree, what does Meraki use? I will open up another thread on Meraki.

@donald-muncy said in Extreme Network Switches offer better features than Cisco?:

Thanks for helping me understand Ronnie.

Is MLAG the feature that some people may be referring to as replacing spanning-tree?

it appears to deal with the worst of STP very well. The loss of bandwidth as being he big issue when a port is blocking.
So think of it more of improving on network control using a separate control plane. But the loss of the control plane may be where we still find silly issue occurring that affect the network...which may be different depending on the vendor.

If MLAG is the technology be referenced, I would think the same claim would made to replace spanning-tree with port aggregation methods such as using PAGP or LACP. I do not consider LACP or PAGP as being candidates to replacing spanning-tree.
Both of those two have to do with Aggregating the links rather than loop prevention tool which is all that STP really does. It can do it over LACP or PAgP but it can also do it over single links too.

Should I be considering disabling spanning-tree?
Depends on your switch configuration....if you have redundancy in setting up multiple switches. Not until you understand what the consequences are.

Speaking of spanning tree, what does Meraki use? I will open up another thread on Meraki.

https://documentation.meraki.com/MS/Port_and_VLAN_Configuration/Configuring_Spanning_Tree_on_Meraki_Switches_(MS)

it looks like it's at least backward compatable.

I need to read more about MLAG. From what I understand, the salesman tells me that MLAG will detect multiple links to a switch and aggregate the connections to prevent redundancy.

I reviewed the root bridges topic on some of your courses, Ronnie. All roads lead to the king (the root bridge). Suppose I have sales team members in different wings of a building across the first, second, and third floor configured for access on Vlan 3 (#name sales). If a server for the sales team is on the 2nd floor, I will configure the Sales Vlan 3 root closet to the server. This change of the vlan 3 root would reduce unnecessary traffic, creating a more direct path to the server. Does MLAG similarly optimize connectivity?

Thanks for the reference to Meraki switches. I just installed a few Meraki devices. I liked how I could configure the appliances before they arrived!

@donald-muncy said in Extreme Network Switches offer better features than Cisco?:

I need to read more about MLAG. From what I understand, the salesman tells me that MLAG will detect multiple links to a switch and aggregate the connections to prevent redundancy.

I reviewed the root bridges topic on some of your courses, Ronnie. All roads lead to the king (the root bridge). Suppose I have sales team members in different wings of a building across the first, second, and third floor configured for access on Vlan 3 (#name sales). If a server for the sales team is on the 2nd floor, I will configure the Sales Vlan 3 root closet to the server. This change of the vlan 3 root would reduce unnecessary traffic, creating a more direct path to the server. Does MLAG similarly optimize connectivity?

It's kind of weird to think of it like this because MLAG appears separate out the data plane and control plane for switching to provide better bandwidth and to insure the failure let's say of a ports at the data plane can be handled via the fact that the control plane can take that into consideration. The only thing I don't understand is what happens when the control plane fails..what is the fall back plan.

So what does the sales mean? When switches are setup in a redundant connection that could possibly cause a loop. MLAG will "on-the-fly" be able to aggregate the links so that they work similiar to the way that LACP will work and be seen as a single link rather than 2 separate links which can cause a loop. At least that's what I think.... I don't really know much about it at this stage since I've not worked in that environment.

The key for most companies is to ask about technical support (similar to Cisco TAC) and what SLA can you get from it. Most teams don't mind as long there is someone who can help when implementation is not going well or someone can explain or even fix the behavior.

Thanks for the reference to Meraki switches. I just installed a few Meraki devices. I liked how I could configure the appliances before they arrived!

After talking to my friend Dominik, I learned that Cisco’s MLAG solution is known as Virtual Port Channel (vPC).

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/ios-nx-os-software/nx-os-software/217274-understand-virtual-port-channel-vpc-en.html

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/dcn/nx-os/nexus9000/101x/configuration/interfaces/cisco-nexus-9000-nx-os-interfaces-configuration-guide-101x/b-cisco-nexus-9000-nx-os-interfaces-configuration-guide-93x_chapter_01000.html

You did mention virtual private channels in your earlier posts, Ronnie. Thanks again