From: James Ventre (messageboard@ventrefamily.com)
Date: Mon Jul 24 2006 - 13:55:25 ART
>Kay D wrote:
>HSRP with 1 group does not do equal Load distribution
I said "1 group" as in 1 GLBP group, not 1 HSRP group.
Which NIC the server uses is goverened by your NIC teaming software. You
set a preferred NIC, and the failback options as well as keepalives
(recommended).
I'm not sure if it's supported on a 3750, but the Feature Navigator will
tell you.
http://tools.cisco.com/ITDIT/CFN/jsp/index.jsp
James
Kay D wrote:
Hi James ,
HSRP with 1 group does not do equal Load distribution as with 2
groups . But GLBP seems to be a good option, but i am looking forward
to deploy it in a 3750 . Does a 3750 support GLBP ?
Is there an application or some kinda mechanism ,,, which make a
server to choose the right NIC . For eg if the 3750 is the active
switch for Server1 ,,, i would like to control the server to send
traffic only thru first NIC ,,,,as the second NIC shold be used
until the link to switch 1 is down,,so that it directs traffic thru
the second uplink .
TIA
Kay D
On 7/24/06, James Ventre < messageboard@ventrefamily.com> wrote:
> So avoiding these disadvantages ,,, is is there another
solution ?
1 Group. GLBP.
James
Kay D wrote:
> Is there a better way of doing MHSRP with Load Balancing in
mind
>
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 2 switches cat1 and cat2 ,,,with cat1 connected to servers s1
,s2 (at
> fa0/1,fa0/2)and cat2 connected to servers s3,s4 (at f0/1 ,
f0/2) . I have
> connected servers s1,s2 to cat2
> at (fa0/3 , fa0/4) and similiarly i have connected servers s3 ,
s4 to cat1
> 's fa0/3 , fa0/4 for redundancy .
>
> Note: All the ports are in one vlan ie vlan 2
>
> Now i am running MHSRP ,
>
> I would like to restrict the number of MHSRP groups to 2 ,where
>
> a.)cat1 is active for GROUP 1(value of 110) AND passive for
GROUP 2
> b.)cat2 is active for GROUP 2(value of 110) and passive for
GROUP 1
>
> Now i track the interface f0/1 at cat1 , if f0/1 is down then i
reduce the
> priority of group 1 to 90 ,,such that the cat2 would take over
as active for
> s1
>
> So the question is based on the following ?
>
> i run MSHRP on a vlan 2, and if fa0/1 on cat1 is down then all
the traffic
> from s2 also would go to cat2 eventhough Fa0/2 is up on cat1 .
>
> if i am running MHSRP on fa0/1 ,2,3,4 routed
ports individually ,,,and i
> need to run 8 MHSRP groups which needs more processing
power , if scale
> the number of servers to
> a larger number .
>
> So avoiding these disadvantages ,,, is is there another
solution ?
>
> Apologies for making it so long
>
> TIA ,
> Kay D
>
>
_______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.4/396 - Release Date: 7/24/2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Aug 01 2006 - 07:13:48 ART