[c-nsp] 7200's (LNS) HSRP and VRF's

[Tony]

Hi,

You won't see a "routing conflict". Both routers are able to advertise the connected LAN subnet without any issues and BGP will choose the "best" route. If you don't want stuff advertised by BGP then you could use a route-map to control or influence it.

You could always set it up in a vritual environment using dynamips to test first.


regards,
Tony.






>________________________________
> From: Jimbo Jones <jimbojones001 at outlook.com>
>To: "cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net" <cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net> 
>Sent: Sunday, 14 April 2013 8:00 AM
>Subject: [c-nsp] 7200's (LNS) HSRP and VRF's
> 
>
>Hi,
>
>We have 2 x 7200's running as LNS's terminating DSL tails - The DSL tails(sessions) are load-balanced across both 7200's by our upstream carrier.
>
>The 7200's have HSRP running on the "LAN" side, so that our clients connect to the virtual ip
>
>The client "LAN" interfaces are in VRF's (As are the auth'd DSL tails) - We need the 7200's to exchange routing information for these VRF's (So run MP-BGP on the link between the 7200's), but if we do this, the LAN(HSRP) Interfaces in a given VRF would be in the same subnet, so I assume we would see a routing conflict?
>
>We unfortunately cant test this as the system is live...we can organise an outage window, but Im hoping someone has a similar setup, or can offer some advice on the best way to set this up?
>
>Thanks.
>                          
>_______________________________________________
>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/
>
>
>