Re: EIGRP with HSRP Question.

Horse is dead

On Friday, February 8, 2013, JB Poplawski wrote:

> This is the actual config. My HSRP primary is 10.15.20.2. I don't want
> any added latency between .3 and .2 as .2 is HSRP root and STP root.
> I think switching the IPs around would be a crude way to accomplish this.
>
> Thoughts?
> JB
>
> Temp01#show ip route 10.15.0.0
> Routing entry for 10.15.0.0/16
> Known via "eigrp 100", distance 170, metric 51456, type external
> Redistributing via eigrp 100
> Last update from 10.15.20.2 on GigabitEthernet0/1, 06:14:27 ago
> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> * 10.15.20.3, from 10.15.20.3, 06:14:27 ago, via GigabitEthernet0/1
> Route metric is 51456, traffic share count is 1
> Total delay is 1010 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 100000 Kbit
> Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1492 bytes
> Loading 1/255, Hops 1
> 10.15.20.2, from 10.15.20.2, 06:14:27 ago, via GigabitEthernet0/1
> Route metric is 51456, traffic share count is 1
> Total delay is 1010 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 100000 Kbit
> Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1492 bytes
> Loading 1/255, Hops 1
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 6:42 AM, marc edwards <renorider_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So we see a /8..... I haven't seen network to know why it ended up
> this way. I understand that removing summary could load up rib... more
> than i previously thought.... I still think you can get this done by
> adjusting with longest prefix match and avoiding quite a bit of
> delay/distance/metric/variance tweaks. If you are weary of taking away
> a summary, just add a more specific summary (i.e. /24) to R1 interface
> that neighbor-ships form on.
>
> regards,
>
> Marc
>
> On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:54 AM, Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar>
> wrote:
> > If I read JB correctly, he is trying to have simetrical in/out paths
> > via a pair of border routers/switches.
> > Problem is... HSRP has no easy way to be linked to the L3 control plane.
> > In other words, it is not easy to let the outside (WAN) router know
> which is
> > your current active HSRP router. I've long wished there was an HSRP
> track of
> > sorts. But now one can be made with EEM.
> >
> > -Carlos
> >
> > marc abel @ 08/02/2013 02:58 -0300 dixit:
> >
> >> The fact that the metrics are the same shows that the hops, bandwidth,
> and
> >> delay are the same, so you aren't introducing anymore more latency by
> >> selecting either route. In fact you may be better off letting the router
> >> remain on the link that is NOT your HSRP primary because then you won't
> be
> >> competing with your user traffic as much. Another option would be to
> turn
> >> on equal cost load balancing so it can use both paths. The default
> should
> >> be 4 equal paths. You can change this with "maximum-paths" under the
> eigrp
> >> process.
> >>
> >> If you are sure you want to make it prefer the other path you can do
> this
> >> by influencing the metric by changing the bandwith or delay on the link,
> >> or
> >> using an offset list to make one more or less desirable. Changing the
> >> bandwidth or delay don't actually affect link performance, just the
> metric
> >> they use to determine which path is more desirable.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:29 PM, JB Poplawski
> >> <jb.poplawski_at_gmail.com>wrote:
> >>
> >>> Routing entry for 192.168.0.0/8
> >>> Known via "eigrp 100", distance 170, metric 51456, type external
> >>> Redistributing via eigrp 100
> >>> Last update from 192.168.1.2 on GigabitEthernet0/1, 06:14:27 ago
> >>> Routing Descriptor Blocks:
> >>> * 192.168.1.3, from 192.168.1.3, 06:14:27 ago, via
> GigabitEthernet0/1
> >>> Route metric is 51456, traffic share count is 1
> >>> Total delay is 1010 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 100000
> Kbit
> >>> Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1492 bytes
> >>> Loading 1/255, Hops 1
> >>> 192.168.1.2, from 192.168.1.2, 06:14:27 ago, via
> GigabitEthernet0/1
> >>> Route metric is 51456, traffic share count is 1
> >>> Total delay is 1010 microseconds, minimum bandwidth is 100000
> Kbit
> >>> Reliability 255/255, minimum MTU 1492 bytes
> >>> Loading 1/255, Hops 1
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:13 PM, marc edwards <renorider_at_gmail.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Longest prefix match always wins. Remove summary to reveal more
> >>>> specific routes. Could be that simple or as complicated as you want to
> >>>> make it.
> >>>>
> >>>> Regards,
> >>>>
> >>>> Marc
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 8:00 PM, JB Poplawski <jb.poplawski_at_gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Both core routers/switches advertise the same subnet. WAN Router
> sees
> >>>>
> >>>> both
> >>>>>
> >>>>> routes, but prefers the higher IP (or so it seems).

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Fri Feb 08 2013 - 07:43:12 ART