So here's a quick comparison of the different versions of spending tree the spending tree to did one
deep protocol doesn't need a lot of resources but is slow to converge.
You only have one spending tree instance for you entirely to network.
This can lead to some optimal traffic flows and a two to one deal.
Generally not used today in Cisco environments.
Just be aware that when you use new versions of spanning tree Cisco switches are backward compatible
and can talk to older switches or non Cisco switches using added to that one.
The previous t is the Cisco enhancement that provides a single instance of spending tripa villain.
It's uska proprietary.
It needs more resources because one spending tree instance is created per villain.
It is still slow to converge but does allow you to split traffic flows because you have one spending
tree instance Pavillion as an example.
Villon one traffic could use one uplink but violent to traffic could use a separate uplink or separate
port in a network so Skeff also enhanced previous t with features such as port fast uplink fast backbone
fast PPD U-God DPD faulter route God and Leupp God will discuss some of those terms in this course.
Otherwise you'll learn more about those when you attend your CC empy courses respites spending tree
protocol or ADA 2 to 1 W is an industry standard protocol.
It doesn't need as many resources as previously plus because it supports a single instance of spanning
tree for your laya to network.
It's big advantage is that it provides very quick or fast convergence.
It also doesn't address sub optimal traffic flow issues because she can't send VLAN 10 traffic for example
Don one link and violent 20 traffic down another link.
That's the advantage of rapid PTSD plus rapid perviously plus incorporates the advantages of rapid spending.
But allows you to create one spanning tree instance povi land so you can do load sharing of traffic.
It provides a very quick convergence but uses a lot of resources especially when you've got many villains.
The advantage of multiple spending tree is that it solves the high resource issue of PVC plus multiple
spending tree allows you to create a instance of spending tree and map of various villans to that instance
as an example once again if you had 200 villans previous t or rapid Peavey's tea would require 200 instances
of spanning tree whereas multiple spending tree could use two instances to do load sharing and reduce
the amount of resources required.
So C-p you add memory requirements for multiple spending tree are lower than those for rapid previously
plus but resources are higher than those for rapid spending tree.
Now you may find reference material stating that PVC Plus is the default spending tree on Siska switches.
That really depends a lot of switches today.
Use a rapid Peavey's T is the default version of spanning tree.