[cisco-voip] IOS VG Link redundancy

[Sean Walberg]

Do the vg224s support BVI?  Turn the two interfaces into a bridge with
the bvi int holding the IP and let STP sort it out.  Would work a lot
better if it supports rstp.

Sean

On 1/26/09, Lelio Fulgenzi <lelio at uoguelph.ca> wrote:
> That's an interesting document - something I'll file for future reference.
>
> However, I'm not sure how it helps here. The VGWs are routers themselves
> with two uplinks. Since you can't have two interfaces on the same network
> they have to be separate layer three routes to the upstream router. That's
> the only I see this work (confirmed by a few others).
>
> Whether it's static or dynamic, somewhere on the network (and the device)
> you have to configure routing to get back/forth. Especially if you are using
> loopbacks. I don't think you can avoid this.
>
> If you want to use only one interface, then routing is not required,
> however, I think that was the original post - making use of the two
> interfaces.
>
> I'd be glad to hear alternatives.
>
> ---
> Lelio Fulgenzi, B.A.
> Senior Analyst (CCS) * University of Guelph * Guelph, Ontario N1G 2W1
> (519) 824-4120 x56354 (519) 767-1060 FAX (JNHN)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> "Bad grammar makes me [sic]" - Tshirt
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Nikola Stojsin" <nikolastojsin at gmail.com>
> To: "Brandon Bennett" <bennetb at gmail.com>, "Jason Aarons (US)"
> <jason.aarons at us.didata.com>
> Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 8:41:42 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IOS VG Link redundancy
>
>
>
>
> As long as you do not need load balancing between voice gateways, HSRP would
> work really well here, I think. I do not know what your OSPF topology looks
> like, but something along the lines of HSRP with totally stubby OSPF area
> would be my choice here. It is about as simple as it gets.
>
>
>
> If you do need load balancing, you can use Multigroup HRSP (
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk362/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080094e90.shtml
> ), with one caveat: some NICs cannot handle multiple MAC addresses, so,
> depending on the router model, MHRSP may or may not work.
>
>
>
> Actually, it would be interesting to see which – HSRP, OSPF or EIGRP – would
> converge/failover the fastest.
>
>
>
> HTH,
>
> Nikola
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Nikola Stojsin
>
> PhD CCIE #12888
>
> President
>
> Network Makers LLC
>
> 110 Wall Street, 11th Floor
>
> New York, NY 10005
>
> (212) 709-8201
>
> (212) 706-2986 (fax)
>
> nikolas at networkmakers.com
>
> -------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> From: cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net
> [mailto:cisco-voip-bounces at puck.nether.net] On Behalf Of Brandon Bennett
> Sent: Monday, January 26, 2009 7:38 PM
> To: Jason Aarons (US)
> Cc: cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] IOS VG Link redundancy
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Wh at makes you want to change it?
>
>
>
> Well it's mostly a political thing. We are trying to remove the network team
> from the gateways and remove the voice team from the network.
>
> Also 12.4(15)T8 which is required for our CVP install has proven itself so
> completely unstable that the idea of having it in my routing domain scares
> me and probably the less services running on it the better.
>
> I am doing max-metric, and a separate OSPF area for the VGs so that they
> will never try to route traffic not for them, but it seems to me there
> should be a better way to have an IOS device that doesn't have to
> participate with a RP with the rest of the network.
>
>
>
> -Brandon
> _______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

Sean Walberg <sean at ertw.com>    http://ertw.com/