[nsp] HSRP 6500/SUP2

[Hudson Delbert J Contr 61 CS/SCBN]

Robert,

correct. as the config on the desktops would point at the hsrp virtual
address
as the gateway. rule of thumb, if you can ping it using a static and there's

no dynamic routing protocol running, dont use it. i would not run ospf on
the interfaces
running hsrp as its not needed. the lan interfaces can use statics or
defaults to haul
traffic out the right interfaces toward the backbone. Which is better? Not
having to run
the SPF algorithm at all (remember, no routing while calculating routes) or
a few hellos 
limited to the hsrp cluster. we ran tests here and robert's config is very
stable routing wise. 
seems in this setup, hsrp's fail-over is faster than ospf's convergence.

~v/r
delbert.hudson at losangeles.af.mil

-----Original Message-----
From: Robert A. Hayden [mailto:rhayden at geek.net]
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 5:54 PM
To: Wilson, Dan
Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [nsp] HSRP 6500/SUP2


HSRP would be needed to terminate a LAN connection, or the PCs will never
find their gateway if the primary goes down.  For a backbone-facing link,
yea, use OSPF to get the packet there.  If I mis-understood the original
question, I apologize.

On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Wilson, Dan wrote:

> IMHO, HSRP is a waste of time in this application.
>
> I'm in a similar situation, and am using OSPF to "load balance" and
> Provide "redundancy".
>
> Always up on both connections, router table converges to take care of L3
> connectivity, no wasted bandwidth on hellos.
>
> Anybody see potential issues with this?
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert A. Hayden [mailto:rhayden at geek.net]
> Sent: Monday, September 22, 2003 5:22 PM
> To: Charles Von Dartmooth
> Cc: cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [nsp] HSRP 6500/SUP2
>
> HSRP handles the Layer 3 failover just fine.  Use per-VLAN rapid spanning
> tree to handle the Layer 2 cutover.  Set up the VLAN on an interlink port
> between the boxes as well.  Set the spanning tree priority for your
> primary switch to 0 and on your backup as 4096.
>
> I'm doing this for our campus network using 6513s and 6506s in Hybrid
> Mode and it works pretty good.
>
> - Robert
>
> On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Charles Von Dartmooth wrote:
>
> > Greetings,
> >
> >  I am interested in setting up HSRP with 2 6500
> > SUP2-MSFC2 which provider L3 connectivity for a lan
> > enviornment to the rest of the network. There are a
> > few hundered VLANs setup. Given the 16 group
> > limitation on the SUP2, what is the best way to set it
> > up so that redudancy can be provided to each
> > individual VLAN without effecting the rest of them?
> > (IE I wish to shutdown 1 vlan on 1 switch, without the
> > other taking over for all the rest.) How are the VLANs
> > tied toghter if I use 1 group for all?
> >
> > TIA, Charles
> >
> > __________________________________
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software
> > http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> >
> >
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/