HP 2510G Loop Protect doesn't work
Solution 1
I had solved the Problem by follow the hint from richardb.
How i have done this:
- Set Broadcast Limit to 30%
- Setting up loop-protect for all Ports
All loops are detected from now.
Solution 2
Spanning Tree is not an option. The Network contains Switches from different Vendors and Spanning Tree is not compatible enough.
If your switches don't at least support MST which has been around for almost 10 years now, replace that garbage. Disabling spanning tree is the most incorrect solution to the problem.
CookieCrash
Updated on September 18, 2022Comments
-
CookieCrash over 1 year
I have a problem with Loop-Protect on a HP 2510G Switch.
I configured Loop-Protect with
loop-protect all receiver-action send-disableand settransmit-interval 1anddisable-timer 30.I tested my setup:
Client 1 at Port 1 ping Client 2 at Port 2.
Then I directly connected Ports 3 and 4 with a patch-cable.
The most times the Loop was detectet and Port 3 and 4 go down.
2 of 14 Loops are never detected and the Network will be flooded.What could be the error?
Here is the output of
show loop-protect:ProCurve Switch 2510G-48# show loop-protect Status and Counters - Loop Protection Information Transmit Interval (sec) : 1 Port Disable Timer (sec) : 30 Loop Detected Trap : Disabled Loop Loop Loop Time Rx Port Port Protection Detected Count Since Last Loop Action Status ---- ----------- --------- ---------- ---------------- ------------ -------- 1 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 2 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 3 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 4 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 5 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 6 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 7 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 8 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 9 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 10 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 11 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 12 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 13 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 14 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 15 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 16 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 17 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 18 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 19 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 20 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 21 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 22 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 23 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 24 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 25 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 26 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 27 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 28 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 29 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 30 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 31 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 32 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 33 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 34 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 35 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 36 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 37 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 38 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 39 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 40 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 41 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 42 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 43 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 44 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 45 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 46 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 47 Yes No 0 send-disable Down 48 Yes No 0 send-disable Down ProCurve Switch 2510G-48#-
richardb almost 10 yearsI would personally use loop-protect in addition to spanning tree, rather than instead of it; with that the forwarding delay will protect your network. With loop-protect you are reduced to damage limitation after the fact. If you set a broadcast limit that might stop the ports saturating with junk and let the loop-protect packets through - I've not tried that though.
-
CookieCrash almost 10 yearsSpanning Tree is not an option. The Network contains Switches from different Vendors and Spanning Tree is not compatible enough. I will test your Broadcast Limit Idea.
-
Xavier Lucas over 9 years@CookieCrash Amazing ...
-
