HSRP vs VRRP for IPv6 on IOS-XE - rekindling an old flame

-Hammer- bhmccie at gmail.com
Mon Aug 20 16:26:07 CDT 2012


It's a good argument Owen. Unfortunately it looks like VRRP is not an 
available feature on the ASR for IPv6 FHRP. I'm still trying to confirm 
it but it is definitely not configurable in my version of code and if 
it's "just coming out" in a "new release" there is no way I'm jumping in 
with both feet. I'll have to stick with HSRP and LL addressing. If 
anyone knows different please let me know. Thanks

PS: Yes, I still have some ISL. :( On legacy environments only though. I 
promise. Nothing new in years...

-Hammer-

"I was a normal American nerd"
-Jack Herer

On 8/20/2012 3:31 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
> VRRP is to HSRP what 802.1q is to ISL...
>
> I highly recommend using VRRP instead of HSRP because:
>
> 1.	It is a more robust protocol
> 2.	It is vendor agnostic
> 3.	Being vendor agnostic it is more likely to have a continuing future.
>
> Does anyone still use ISL?
>
> Owen
>
> On Aug 20, 2012, at 13:10 , sthaug at nethelp.no wrote:
>
>>> Yeah I see the disconnect. I'm assuming that what I see is what I get.
>>> Which means I'm going to stick with HSRP. If our AS team gives me any
>>> good feedback that I can share I will do so. Thanks Nick.
>>>
>>> XE: v4: HSRPv1, HSRPv2, VRRP                v6: HSRPv2
>> Not particularly relevant to the original question - however, I'd like
>> to mention that we've been using IPv6 VRRP on our Juniper routers for
>> well over a year. No particular problems so far.
>>
>> Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug at nethelp.no
>
>




More information about the NANOG mailing list