On 01/05/2010, at 10:09 PM, <[email protected]> <[email protected]> wrote: > It hasn't given me any surprises. TAC reviewed it, told me I should be fine, > didn't seem to share my (or the OP's) concern about making the keepalive > robust.
the L3 (IP) based vPC keepalive is purely intended to assist in dealing with split-brain if the vPC peer-link is non-functional. having simultaneous failure of both would be an unusual circumstance, particularly if you follow best-practice on the vPC peer-link itself.. cheers, lincoln. _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
