Typically a HSRP VIP is utilized as the gateway for routing off a particular
LAN segment. If you choose
a HSRP member off the local LAN than you either already know how to route
off network
(perhaps you are running routed or gated) or you have proxy-arp enabled. In
either case why do
you need HSRP in the first place? This is a non standard approach to a high
availability problem that potentially
weakens your security posture.

If you need additional address space why not bring up a secondary IP range
on the VLAN
and migrate to that?  I understand using it temporarily to fix a problem
because of address exhaustion.

I guess my question is, perhaps it works, but why would you?. Making it work
potentially creates other problems. In the end its all about the layer 2 and
layer 3
interaction. If you are ok with turning on proxy-arp and the related
security implications,
go for it.

harbor235


On 11/20/07, Peter Rathlev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 06:42 -0500, Paul Stewart wrote:
> > I asked this question last year at some point.... I was told by many
> > that it's a bad idea, but I did have a few people chime in to say they
> > had done it with great success...
> >
> > This doesn't answer your question but if you have a chance give it a
> > try is what I'd say.  We thought in our HSRP setup we would have to
> > have the IP's in different subnets but ended up working just fine in
> > an existing subnet so never actually had a chance to try it the other
> > way..
>
> Yes, we have it running a few places with no problems, apart from the
> already mentioned, so I guess regular reasoning is the key here.
>
> On Tue, 2007-11-20 at 11:43 +0000, Tim Franklin wrote:
> > You lose the diagnostic ability to ping / check arp / etc explicitly to
> > the primary or secondary box.  If that's not important to you, it does
> > save burning a couple of addresses from the customer-facing LAN subnet.
>
> Not optimal about diagnostics, no, but it's exactly because the
> customer doesn't want us to use "his" addresses. We can let them
> decide, and tell them that it may be a little more comples to
> troubleshoot.
>
> Thanks for the input, now I have a little more to continue with. :-)
>
> Regards,
> Peter Rathlev
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
> archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
>
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list  [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/

Reply via email to