While working on a set of switches I noticed that the spanning tree path costs aren't set up to match on opposite sides of the same physical link. For some reason that doesn't look right to me. Shouldn't the same link be set with the same path cost? Why or why not?
More specifically we have a loop configured as such:
Cisco 1/1/1 -> HP 7 A4 Cisco 2/1/1 -> HP 8 B1 HP 7 A2 -> HP 8 A1
HP 8 is set up with A1 path-cost 2000000 HP 7 is set up with A2 path-cost 20000
Cisco is set up with spanning-tree mst priority 0.