[nanog] Cisco GLBP/HSRP question -- Has it ever been dis
Grant Taylor
gtaylor at tnetconsulting.net
Tue Aug 6 03:20:51 UTC 2019
On 8/5/19 1:17 PM, Vincentz Petzholtz wrote:
> And as far as I remember: If a member fails then another one is taking
> over responsibility over the used mac address.
That's my understanding as well.
> It surprised me a little bit that this never really taken off (not
> even within Cisco folks in the enterprise field as far as I know).
The few times that it's been discussed with colleagues has usually run
into an issue of "how do we do GLBP between two L3 switches?".
I get the impression that GLBP would be more likely used with separate
routers connected to common switches that didn't do L3 switching.
> I was also keen if/when this ever get available on other vendors
> and/or open source software.
Agreed.
I did some sleuthing and just learned that OpenBSD's Common Address
Redundancy Protocol (also ported to other *BSDs and Linux) does support
an active/active configuration.
I found some details in FreeBSD's carp(4) man page. Search said page
for "net.inet.carp.arpbalance".
So … I'm going to need to do some pontification about CARP. }:-)
> Just as everybody else we do run two VRRP instances with ECMP style
> routes on datacenter gear a lot.
I see VRRP used a lot as a way to move VIPs between servers for similar
redundancy reasons.
> But in some situations it would be nice to have something to spread
> the traffic across different routers (even when the client is too
> „dump“ for ecmp routes).
Yep. Cisco's GLBP can do that. I now know that OpenBSD's CARP can do
that too. (#todayilearned)
--
Grant. . . .
unix || die
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4008 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20190805/a7491669/attachment.bin>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list