To make it even uglier, you can configure (using eem again) pbr under the upstream interface to send all these requests to the appropriate router, bypassing the connected routes.
-- Tassos Phil Mayers wrote on 28/10/2007 2:27 μμ: > On Sat, 2007-10-27 at 18:02 +0300, Tassos Chatzithomaoglou wrote: >> One ugly way to do it would be to create an eem applet on both routers which >> would do the following: >> >> 1) watch for syslog messages "STANDBY ....Active->xxx" and then "decrease" >> the metric of these >> redistributed connected routes through configuring the local router >> 2) watch for syslog messages "STANDBY ....xxx->Active" and then "increase" >> the metric of these >> redistributed connected routes through configuring the local router > > That only gets you halfway. The standby router still has a connected > route which CANNOT be overridden by a routing protocol route; so in my > original diagram if packets even *hit* the standby, they'll go out the > 100meg link as opposed to across the gigE link to the active router > > It is also, as you say, very very ugly. > _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
