From: kasturi cisco (kasturi_cisco@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri May 09 2003 - 12:04:47 GMT-3
Folks,
Here is how i understand it. It totally depends on what u want ? Let us
consider the following scenario(s) where only 2 routers are involved with
Ethernet being the common interface and having serial/wan links.
=======================
Case 1. Router A priority=150, Rtr B priority =100, no interface tracking
on A, when A (active) fails, B (standby) takes over and when A comes UP -
u dont care. So B can continue to be active. In this case u dont need
"preempt" on either.
Case 2. Router A priority=150, Rtr B priority =100, no interface tracking
on A, when A (active) fails, B (standby) takes over and when A comes UP -
u want A to become active and want B to go into standby. In this case
u need "preempt" on A not on B (as u want A which has higher priority to
tell B to back off. So A sends a coup message. When a lower priority
active router B receives a coup message or hello message from a higher
priority router A, it changes to the speak state and sends a resign
message.).
Case 3. Router A priority=150, Rtr B priority =100, with interface
tracking on A, when A's tracked interface (assuming Wan/serial link)
fails the standby <grp> track interface priority command lowers priority
on A to less than B and B (standby still) has to take over. In this case
u need "preempt" on B. Once again if u want A to to become Active when
link comes up u must have "preempt" on A else do u dont need.
U can use the prempt delay to delay the router preemption. The link sent
by Jay i think is a good one. Hope this helps. Correct me if needed.
Good Luck,[IMAGE]
Kasturi.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's spooky. It's a thriller. See Bhoot slideshow
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jun 02 2003 - 15:13:39 GMT-3