From: Plank, Jason (JPlank@concordefs.com)
Date: Mon Jun 19 2006 - 08:30:09 ART
Another way out would be to track a down interface on R2 and then it would
decrement it's priority ;-)
-------------------
J. Marshall Plank
Network Engineer
101 Bellevue Parkway
Wilmington, DE 19809
E-mail: JPlank@concordefs.com
Phone: 302-793-5913
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Shanky
Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 5:51 AM
To: Kay D
Cc: Cisco certification
Subject: Re: setting up HSRP priority w/o priority command
Hi,
Glad it worked, so the task must have a wording like R1 should be the active
router and not what you mentioned that R1's priority should be higher
without using ..any commands on any routers.
Is it? Coz the HSRP election would be won by
1. Priority
2. IP address of the I/F.
So, if you want R1 to be Active for HSRP, either it should have higher
priority or higher IP address.
Do let me know if the Task clearly says to increase the priority without
using the preemt or priority commands ? or does it say only to ensure R1 is
the active router ?
Thanks
Shanky
On 6/19/06, jhtemail <jhtemail@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
>
> I would suggest HRSP must have a backup condition in case of a tie in
> priority. Maybe something like manipulating the IP Address of the
> interface,
> something like the higher IP Address wins. Someone else may have a better
> idea but check your other options there may be a way to tip the balance.
> Could also try playing with the MAC Address setting. Setup HRSP see which
> one becomes Active, then see what you need to manipulate to switch it to
> the
> other. For testing reasons use the pre-empt command and when you have
> cracked it take out the pre-empt command and set the system up as
> requested
> in the question.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Kay
> D
> Sent: Monday, 19 June 2006 7:00 PM
> To: Shanky
> Cc: Cisco certification
> Subject: Re: setting up HSRP priority w/o priority command
>
> Thanks , we are not supposed to use standy priority nor preempt on neither
> routers .
> Any other way out ????
>
>
>
> On 6/19/06, Shanky <shankyz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > If the requirement says ..R1 should have higher priority....without
> using
> > the standby priority command..why not change R2 (The other router on the
> > segment) priority to lower (Say 90). This will make R1's priority higher
> > without using the command on R1.
> >
> >
> > Hope it helps
> >
> > Shanky
> >
> >
> > On 6/19/06, Kay D <krsna83@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > How do we setup higher HSRP priority on a router without using
> > standy priority or preempt .
> >
> > Thanks ,
> > Kay D
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 01 2006 - 07:57:33 ART