forgive my throwing in my own ignorant observations....
I see this discussion as an exercise in bottom up network design. I know
what HSRP is, I know what DHCP is. Now how do I make them do what I want?
to quote a sage, one must begin by asking the basic question - what is the
problem you are trying to solve?
when the problem is defined, then one moves to the examination of
alternatives. Life is more difficult when you begin with the solution, and
then try to get that solution to meet the need. Years of managing technology
in a firm full of whiney crybaby ignorant users has left me with a lot of
experience with people who tell you what the solution is without bothering
to think about the problem. ( "I want you to implement a system here we all
use Windows address book to look up company wide information, contacts,
etc." )
As I read the original definition of the problem - multihomed ISP's,
multiple paths, how do I assure internet connectivity? ( and "load balance"
as well, I presume ) then the solution goes beyond the nature of HSRP and
DHCP
if the problem is "how do you ensure that an end user, given these network
circumstances, always have internet access?" then you can break down the
problem into component parts and work from there.
Chuck
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
John Neiberger
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 3:17 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: HSRP [7:10428]
Hmm.... I have no response to that because I've never personally
configured DHCP to do this. However, I've heard several times that this
can be done. Perhaps users on a given subnet must use the same gateway,
but you could alternate gateway addresses on separate subnets. Is that
possible?
Granted, this wouldn't solve the problem if you only had a single
subnet needing internet access, but it would divide traffic from
multiple subnets between the two links.
John
>>> "Marc" 6/29/01 3:58:52 PM >>>
Yeah, but you can't specify two different GWs in the same DHCP global
subnet
scope properties. They all take either one or none. The article states
that
inorder to "load balance" you must set the PCs to divide between the
two
virtual IPs of the GWs. SO basically you have to manually set the GW
on
every PC, then call that "load balancing"
Marc
"John Neiberger" wrote in message
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> It's not a pain if you use DHCP to set the default gateway in your
PCs.
> It would definitely be a pain to do manually, though.
>
> John
>
> >>> "Marc" 6/29/01 3:09:47 PM >>>
> Good link! Seems a bit odd to have the PCs configured with two
> differnet
> GWs. Kind of a manual pain. Hopefully Sam here do\es not have other
> routers
> with routing protocols involved...Watch out for loops!
>
>
> Marc
>
> "Eric Hoffman" wrote in message
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > Here is a link that may answer some questions about HSRP groups,
and
> what
> it
> > could be used for.
> >
> > http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/619/7.html
> >
> >
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Eric Hoffman
> > Senior Systems Engineer
> > MCP, CCNA, CCNP
> > Computer Professionals International
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Marc [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 4:03 PM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: HSRP [7:10428]
> >
> >
> > 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=10457&t=10428
--------------------------------------------------
FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html
Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
