There doesn't seem to be too much of a problem as long as the master stays healthy. There seem to be major problems though if the master flaps. I'm sure there may be an answer to this. If not I can't imagine me using VRRP much. I'll stick to the proprietary protocols. I would have thought that VRRP would have been developed from some of the proprietary protocols so I would have thought that it would have at least equalled them?
I'll have a read of the RFC. Gaz In article , Priscilla says... > The RFC for VRRP (2338) says this: > > Once Master election has been performed then any unnecessary transitions > between Master and Backup routers can result in a disruption in service. The > protocol should ensure after Master election that no state transition is > triggered by any Backup router of equal or lower preference as long as the > Master continues to function properly. > > It kind of waters that down with the next comment, though: > > Some environments may find it beneficial to avoid the state transition > triggered when a router becomes available that is more preferential than the > current Master. It may be useful to support an override of the immediate > convergence to the preferred path. > > You might want to read the RFC more carefully than I did though. I'm kind of > rushing so I can watch some baseball! > > _______________________________ > > Priscilla Oppenheimer > www.troubleshootingnetworks.com > www.priscilla.com > > Gaz wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > I actually thought of this question while working with VRRP on > > Foundry > > kit. I came across a query, and thought 'I bet Cisco isn't this > > cr*p at > > it'. > > This is very possibly me as I played with VRRP for the first > > time today, > > but I've not found the answer yet with Cisco either. > > > > > > The set up is simple: > > > > A couple of routers running VRRP, with a network on the other > > side of > > them running OSPF. > > > > If the master router goes down, (or for that matter, an > > interface being > > tracked goes down), the backup takes over. If the master comes > > back up > > it immediately takes over as active again, even though it > > hasn't got Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=55506&t=55429 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
