Yes, with HSRP all traffic will go the primary router and the second would
be idle.
You can do some HSRP loadbalancing by having two physical routers and then
each of them configured with two HSRP addresses. One is primary for one
HSRP address and secondary for the other and router two is secondary for the
first HSRP and primary for the second. Then have them track the serials to
decide if they stay primary. That way there is two addresses for default
gateway available to and if one router goes down of if one T1 goes down the
other router takes the whole load.
This way you can point half your devices at one HSRP address for default
gateway and the other half at the other HSRP address. This also helps solve
the problem of trying to load balance across two routers if you are running
NAT because traffic from any given workstation should always go through the
same router except in cases of failure.
Of course, if you want simplicity just plug both T1s into the same router
and keep the second router configured as a hot-swappable spare.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sam Sneed"
To:
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 4:13 PM
Subject: Re: HSRP [7:10428]
> I think it would help if I gave you the scenario I was envisioning. I
would
> like to plan a network where we have 2 seperate routers connecting to our
> ISP or perhaps 2 seperate ISP's. Lets assume 1 ISP, 2 routers ,each with
its
> own full T1 line for simplicity. If 1 router died, I'd like to keep the
> internet connection alive without changing any of the clients default
> gateways. I figured HSRP would be good to apply here becuase it acts as 1
> virtual router. But, would that mean that 1 router would be idle at all
> times not allowing me to ever get more than 1.5MB bandwidth? Or this extra
> idle T1 line just the cost of redundancy in this case?
>
>
> ""Marc"" wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > HSRP is for router redundancy, not WAN circuit redundancy. If you wanted
> to
> > have internet or WAN circuit redundacy, you would of course use two
lines,
> > have equal-cost routes (two default routes...etc) and that's all that's
> > involved. HSRP not needed for WAN load-balancing/redundancy...
> >
> > Marc
> >
> >
> > "Sam Sneed" wrote in message
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > > I was doing a little research on HSRP and had a question for anyone
who
> > has
> > > configured it. I read the whole RFC 2281 and could not find my answer
> > there.
> > > If you have two routers running HSRP with T1 lines to the internet, 1
is
> > the
> > > standby and one is the active. Does all traffic only go through the
> active
> > > at all times unless it dies? If so isn't it a waste not ever utilizing
> the
> > > T1 line thats on standby (of course until the active fails)?
> > >
> > > If bandwidth exceeded 1.5MB would the second router kick in to share
the
> > > load or would it totally take over?
> > >
> > > With these 2 routers acting as a single virtual router would
throughput
> > > ever be able to exceed 1.54 MB assuming each has its own T1
connection?
> > >
> > > thanks
Message Posted at:
http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=10439&t=10428
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
