From: Kay D (krsna83@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Jun 19 2006 - 09:09:51 ART
Valid one Curt . But the lab did not want me to create another interface
unless stated nor an interface was down .
The solution is valid though .
Thanks, Kay
On 6/19/06, Plank, Jason <JPlank@concordefs.com> wrote:
>
> I totally agree. I don't know if you would see this in the real lab or not
> but I imagine they would tell you not to manipulate IP addresses. This
> particular scenario I guess it's probably the easiest way to do it.. not
> sure what vendors lab they are using though.
>
> -------------------
> 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
> Curt
> Girardin
> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 7:20 AM
> To: Kay D; Shanky
> Cc: Cisco certification
> Subject: RE: setting up HSRP priority w/o priority command
>
> Hi,
>
> Lets say R1 needs to have a higher HSRP PROIORITY than R2 without using
> STANDBY PREEMPT or STANDBY PRIORITY commands. I assume they are talking
> about the HSRP PRIORITY values, and not just who will win the election.
>
> Why not leave R1 at it's default priority, then go over to R2 and use
> the standby track command and point it to an interface that happens to
> be down. Thus effectively lowering the PRIORITY on R2. Then R1 will
> have a higher priority than R2 without using the PREEMPT or PRIORITY
> commands.
>
> If there are no "down" interfaces on R2, then just create a tunnel
> interface on R2 with an inaccessable destination, or no destination.
>
> HTH,
>
> Curt Girardin, #15972
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Kay D
> Sent: Monday, June 19, 2006 5:55 AM
> To: Shanky
> Cc: Cisco certification
> Subject: Re: setting up HSRP priority w/o priority command
>
> Hi SHanky,
> The task is to make R1 active without using
> Priority and preempt hence highest ip address could be used .Thanks ,Kay
> .
>
> On 6/19/06, Shanky <shankyz@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > 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
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
> -----------------------------------------
> The information in this message may be proprietary and/or
> confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this
> message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent
> responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient,
> you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or
> copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please notify First Data
> immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your
> computer.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 01 2006 - 07:57:33 ART