[c-nsp] HSRP vs VRRP

[Gert Doering]

Hi,

On Thu, Oct 20, 2005 at 05:06:36PM -0400, Tim Durack wrote:
> Hosts attached to SW-1 get x.x.x.z, those attached to SW-2 get y.y.y.z

*laugh*

So you've just split your network in half, and built two independent
HSRP setups.

Yes, of course this avoids the problem of "when a HSRP setup splits,
half of the hosts have funny connectivity", but now you're at "when
a switch dies, all of the hosts have *no* connectivity" - and I'm not
convinced this is a better failure scenario.

> The advantage is that host connectivity is preserved through RTR
> failure or link failure.

Standard HSRP setup will achieve that as well - *unless* you lose
connectivity between the switches.

> Switch failure is a different matter. The hosts would need to be
> multi-homed to survive that.

*And* need to run a dynamic routing protocol to figure out which
network is still usable and which default gateway to use (they still
might have a local link, depending on the way the switch fails)

gert
-- 
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
                                                           //www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany                             gert at greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025                        gert at net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de