Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2014-01-05 Thread Jeyamurali Sivapathasundaram
When you move to ipv6 :) Jey S. Network Engineer CCIE #41608 Sent from my iPhone On 2 Jan 2014, at 18:17, Blake Dunlap iki...@gmail.com wrote: I'm still waiting for the day that HSRP can use pure L2 addresses to communicate and not burn 3 ips... On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Gert

Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2014-01-02 Thread Phil Mayers
On 02/01/14 17:48, Blake Dunlap wrote: I'm still waiting for the day that HSRP can use pure L2 addresses to communicate and not burn 3 ips... Yeah, that's not ideal. But why not wish for an option to remove the connected route on the standby while you're at it ;o)

Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2014-01-02 Thread Blake Dunlap
There wouldn't be a connected route if it's just L2 communication as the other side wouldn't have an L3 address unless it was active. On Thu, Jan 2, 2014 at 11:54 AM, Phil Mayers p.may...@imperial.ac.ukwrote: On 02/01/14 17:48, Blake Dunlap wrote: I'm still waiting for the day that HSRP can

Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2014-01-02 Thread Blake Dunlap
I'm still waiting for the day that HSRP can use pure L2 addresses to communicate and not burn 3 ips... On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 5:38 AM, Gert Doering g...@greenie.muc.de wrote: Hi, On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 07:54:10PM +, Phil Mayers wrote: On 31/12/2013 19:40, Gert Doering wrote: On Tue,

Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2014-01-02 Thread Gert Doering
Hi, On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 11:48:53AM -0600, Blake Dunlap wrote: I'm still waiting for the day that HSRP can use pure L2 addresses to communicate and not burn 3 ips... Yeah. Or deactivate the standy interface, ip-routing wise, so you can ensure symmetric traffic (which helps ensure that all

Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2014-01-01 Thread Gert Doering
Hi, On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 07:54:10PM +, Phil Mayers wrote: On 31/12/2013 19:40, Gert Doering wrote: On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 03:59:18PM +, Phil Mayers wrote: (Note that changing the HSRP version does not have this property; the old vMAC will be removed from the FDB, and the box won't

Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2013-12-31 Thread Phil Mayers
On 30/12/2013 23:27, Jeff Kell wrote: terribly disruptive. Not sure if we want to leave the HSRP in place (thinking yes) or remove it (and the old router) after the migration, but will cross that bridge when we get there. If you plan on retaining it, remember you'll now be seeing HSRP

Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2013-12-31 Thread Gert Doering
Hi, On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 03:59:18PM +, Phil Mayers wrote: (Note that changing the HSRP version does not have this property; the old vMAC will be removed from the FDB, and the box won't forward traffic destined to it) Could someone remind me why I have to change HSRP to v2 to be able

Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2013-12-31 Thread Phil Mayers
On 31/12/2013 19:40, Gert Doering wrote: Hi, On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 03:59:18PM +, Phil Mayers wrote: (Note that changing the HSRP version does not have this property; the old vMAC will be removed from the FDB, and the box won't forward traffic destined to it) Could someone remind me why

[c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2013-12-30 Thread Jeff Kell
Quick question for someone that's been there, done that, as I'm a bit rushed to try to lab test this... We're adding some new routers (4500Xs) for an upgraded server farm arrangement with a number of server-side vlans / VRFs. The plan was to trunk it with the existing L3 router, and fire up HSRP

Re: [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP...

2013-12-30 Thread Jean-Francois . Dube
: De : Jeff Kell jeff-k...@utc.edu A : cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net cisco-nsp@puck.nether.net, Date : 2013-12-30 18:30 Objet : [c-nsp] Quick question on HSRP... Envoyé par : cisco-nsp cisco-nsp-boun...@puck.nether.net Quick question for someone that's been there, done that, as I'm a bit