RE: HSRP question

From: Hunt Lee (huntl@webcentral.com.au)
Date: Thu May 08 2003 - 21:00:20 GMT-3

• Next message: Mike Williams: "RE: Bridge-group on a Tunnel interface?"
• Previous message: Anthony Pace: "Re: VLAN over WAN - DLSW or other method?"
• Maybe in reply to: lg01: "HSRP question"
• Next in thread: huang gang: "Re: HSRP question"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

So should I need the preempt keyword on both routers or not?

Thanks.

Regards,
Hunt

-----Original Message-----
From: Jay Chandradas [mailto:jachandr@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, 9 May 2003 7:54 AM
To: Jay Chandradas; lg01; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: HSRP question

I thought I should correct my self :-) sorry if I mislead you.

http://www.cisco.com/warp/customer/619/hsrpguidetoc.html#features

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Jay Chandradas
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 11:15 AM
To: lg01; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: HSRP question

The standby preempt interface configuration command allows the router to
become the active router when its priority is higher than all other
HSRP-configured routers in this Hot Standby group. Being said that, I think
w/o preempt command router B will not become active, even if router A is
offline.

This is what I think ..

-Jay
CCIE#8060 ( R&S, Security )

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
lg01
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2003 8:37 AM
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.

• Next message: Mike Williams: "RE: Bridge-group on a Tunnel interface?"
• Previous message: Anthony Pace: "Re: VLAN over WAN - DLSW or other method?"
• Maybe in reply to: lg01: "HSRP question"
• Next in thread: huang gang: "Re: HSRP question"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 02 2003 - 15:13:39 GMT-3