[c-nsp] HSRP or GLBP

[Scott Altman]

HSRP. Based on load-sharing not being necessary and the simplicity of the 
design, HSRP will give you a deterministic mechanism to provide resiliency 
for your hosts. Common practice usually splits the active HSRP gateways 
between the two routers (using the priority command) so that you get some 
load sharing on the routers, but per your statement this wouldn't be 
required. Others like to have all gateways on one router so they can 
accurately determine load (helps plan service levels during failure).

Lastly, HSRP is pretty well baked into all of the code versions and isn't 
undergoing feature enhancement, thus, fewer bugs.

- Scott

On 9/6/05, Eric Helm <helmwork at ruraltel.net> wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> I have a network design that requires redundancy for a several 802.1q
> VLANs (all sharing a single physical router interface). There will be a
> pair of 2811 routers as the default gateway for the VLANs. Additionally,
> in the 2811s there is a 4 port HWIC for some routing to additional
> networks. There are also 2 Pix 515s running in a failover configuration.
> So the network looks something like this:
> 
> VLANs --> 2811 router(s) --> Pix(s) --> Internet
> 
> What is the best design for this scenario?
> HSRP or GLBP?
> (load sharing is not needed)
> 
> Thanks,
> Eric
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>