From: Narbik Kocharians (narbikk@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Sep 08 2007 - 14:50:11 ART
If the active router is handling all the VLANs, then, yes you are correct
the preempt needs to go on the active router (If interface tracking is not
performed). But if you want the load to be shared when both routers are up
then you need one router to be the act for some VLANs and the other router
to be the active for other VLANs, which means that the preempt command is
needed to be configured on both for certain VLANs.
On 9/8/07, Sadiq Yakasai <sadiqtanko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I have been thinking about the same thing for a while now... and this
> is what I have concluded:
>
> If you are not tracking any interface on the Active router, then
> pre-emption is really not needed on both routers I would think. This
> is so because there wouldnt be any situation when the Standby router
> would need to take over anyway, unless the Active router fails
> completely.
>
> See a scenario below pls:
>
> Suppose we have 2 routers:
>
> Active (priority = 120, preempt) and Standby (priority = 100)
>
> I dont have to have preempt enabled on the Standby router because
> there wont be a need for it anyway. When Active fails, Standby takes
> over. When Active comes back up, it takes over. End of story i
> think...
>
> But lets see what someone thinks about this though.
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
-- Narbik Kocharians CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security) CCSI# 30832 www.Net-WorkBooks.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Oct 06 2007 - 12:01:10 ART