On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 02:09:01PM +0000, Nick Hilliard wrote: > On 29/12/2013 13:12, Philipp Kern wrote: > > that's basically what I said. I added the additional point that the DHCP > > server gives out different gateways for load balancing reasons. > > Right, I just misunderstood what you were saying. > > >> No, you can't do tightly timed failover with RAs […] > > > > How would you make that work with DHCPv6? Isn't that also MAC failover > > which you refuse to consider for RAs? > > Let me be more specific: you can only do tightly timed failover with RAs if > you announce a virtual IP address which is tied to a first-hop redundancy > protocol like vrrp/hsrp/etc. This is a vendor specific thing and is not > even supported by many vendors.
Or just specify the ipv6 subnet anycast router address in a route-info RA section. ;) Greetings, Hannes
