From: Colin Barber (Colin.Barber@telewest.co.uk)
Date: Thu May 08 2003 - 13:55:25 GMT-3
You won't need it as, like you say, it will never be in a position to
preempt. Saying that I try, as much as possible, to have a symmetrical
configuration so I would include it.
Colin
-----Original Message-----
From: lg01 [mailto:lg01@myway.com]
Sent: 08 May 2003 16:37
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: HSRP question
Hello Group,
If I have 2 ethernet interfaces routers configured with HSRP, is it
necessary to have the "preempt" option on the 2nd (lower priority router)?
Say RouterA
int eth0
ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
standby 1 ip 192.168.1.10
standby 1 priority 200
standby 1 authentication cisco
standby 1 preempt
And on RouterB
int eth0
ip address 192.168.1.2 255.255.255.0
standby 1 ip 192.168.1.10
standby 1 priority 150
standby 1 authentication cisco
standby 1 preempt ----- Is this needed?
The logic I am thinking is that since RouterB has a lower HSRP priority, if
RouterA is offline, it will become the primary router. But if RouterA is
online, it will always be on Standby anyway, so I'm not sure whether there
is any need for this.
Any input / advice would be greatly appreciated.
Regards,
H.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 02 2003 - 15:13:39 GMT-3