Hooray! We actually solved a problem on GroupStudy. ;-) And someone let us know. It's frustrating when someone asks for help and then never lets us know the resolution. This is supposed to be a GroupStudy, in other words a group learning experience, not a GroupFEEDmeTheAnswerSoIcanDoLessWork. (Sorry, a little cynical due to mean comments on another thread.)
Thanks for letting us know the resolution. Priscilla garrett allen wrote: > > having the interfaces track one another was in fact the secret > sauce > that made it work. i can pull any of the links and it contines > to ping > with minimal interruption. > > cheers! > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: John Neiberger > Date: Friday, March 7, 2003 11:42 am > Subject: Re: it started out as a really good idea ... [7:64638] > > > That's an excellent point. With this design you run a risk of > > asymmetrical routing. To solve this, in the HSRP > configuration on > > eachrouter have the e0 interface track the e1 interface and > vice- > > versa. > > That way, if you pull a cable on one side, this triggers > failover on > > both sides. > > > > Give that a shot, I think it will work. > > > > John > > > > >>> "Priscilla Oppenheimer" 3/6/03 4:23:46 PM > > >>> > > Um, he already has both the E0s in the same subnet and both > the > > E1s in > > the > > same subnet, according to his config. > > > > His drawing is confusing but I think he's got PC1 and both > E0s in > > subnet > > 10.3.0.0/16, say on a hub or a switch. > > > > He's got PC2 and both E1s in subnet 10.4.0.0, on another hub > or > > switch. > > > > If the problem isn't related to misconfiguration of the > default > > gatewayon > > the PCs, I do have another theory. :-) > > > > Say he pulls the E0 cable on Router 1. No problem, PC1 will > start > > using > > Router2. > > > > Then he pings from PC1 to PC2. The ping will probably get > there but > > what > > about the reply coming back? > > > > What happens if PC2 is using Router 1 and Router 1 has no way > to send > > PC2's > > packet from itself to Router 2 due to the missing cable, not > to > > mentionlack > > of any routing protocol configured. > > > > Think about it! :-) > > > > Priscilla > > > > The Long and Winding Road wrote: > > > > > > ""garrett allen"" wrote in message > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > i have a need for a high availability solution for a > default > > > gateway > > > > configuration. just finished the ccdp and thought it > might be > > > > interesting to try hsrp on a pair of 2514's. put some of > > > that theory > > > > to work. instead of highly resiliant i've managed to > > > configure it for > > > > mass failure. arg.., not exactly what i had in mind. > now, > > > any time i > > > > take down 1 of the 4 links, the connect between 2 remote > > > hosts dies. > > > > this is in a lab (production is not a lab, production is > not > > > a lab...) > > > > so it is a mystery i would like to solve, but it is not > > > critical. > > > > > > > > here is the basic config (hope it makes it): > > > > > > > > pc host 1 -----+----- e0 router 1, e1 ----+--------- pc > > > host 2 > > > > | | > > > > |----- e0 router 2, e1 ----| > > > > > > > > the routers act as a default gateway between the internal > > > network > > > > (represented by pc host 1) and the external world > > > (represented by pc > > > > host 2). i have used 10.3 and 10.4 /16 as the addresses > for > > > each side > > > > of the divide. i want to run hsrp on both sets of router > > > interfaces so > > > > that in the event a router or an interface fails, the > traffic > > > impact is > > > > minimized. in the real world pc host 2 will be a firewall > > > and there > > > > will be other hosts off that segment as well > > > > > > > > looks easy. sounds plausible. read the cisco docs. > looks > > > like it > > > > should work. minimal incantations before tickling the > > > keyboard. key > > > > in the configs and it fires up nicely. do the show standby > > > thingee and > > > > all looks cool. can ping the 2 stations end to end. most > > > excellent. > > > > put a router in debug mode. when i pull one of the 4 > router > > > cables the > > > > router goes through a state change but no bits make it to > the > > > far end. > > > > not even the shiney ones. bitstream courtesy of ping. > > > > > > > > maybe i misunderstood what hsrp was suppose to do. the > > > configs are > > > > below, along with the show standby results. both are > 2514's > > > (2 aui's) > > > > and both are running 12.2(1d). probably forgot to put the > > > interface in > > > > mumble mode or something equally easy. no laughter, > please. > > > > > > > > > HSRP assumes the ehternet interfaces to be on the same > subnet. > > > your ehternet > > > side is on two different subnets. hence - no failover. > > > > > > to get this to work using 2514's: > > > > > > > > > E0----------2514_1-----------E1 > > > > > > E0----------2514_2-----------E1 > > > > > > > > > the e0's on the same subnet, the e1's on the same subnet > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > thanks in advance. > > > > > > > > router 1 > > > > interface Ethernet0 > > > > ip address 10.3.255.2 255.255.0.0 > > > > no ip route-cache > > > > no ip mroute-cache > > > > standby 1 priority 200 preempt > > > > standby 1 ip 10.3.0.2 > > > > ! > > > > interface Ethernet1 > > > > ip address 10.4.254.2 255.255.0.0 > > > > no ip route-cache > > > > no ip mroute-cache > > > > standby 2 priority 200 preempt > > > > standby 2 ip 10.4.254.10 > > > > > > > > > > > > router 2 > > > > interface Ethernet0 > > > > ip address 10.3.255.1 255.255.0.0 > > > > no ip route-cache > > > > no ip mroute-cache > > > > standby 1 priority 225 preempt > > > > standby 1 ip 10.3.0.2 > > > > ! > > > > interface Ethernet1 > > > > ip address 10.4.254.1 255.255.0.0 > > > > no ip route-cache > > > > no ip mroute-cache > > > > standby 2 priority 150 preempt > > > > standby 2 ip 10.4.254.10 > > > > > > > > results of show standby > > > > Router1#show standby > > > > Ethernet0 - Group 1 > > > > Local state is Standby, priority 200, may preempt > > > > Hellotime 3 holdtime 10 > > > > Next hello sent in 00:00:00.940 > > > > Hot standby IP address is 10.3.0.2 configured > > > > Active router is 10.3.255.1 expires in 00:00:09, > priority > > > 225 > > > > Standby router is local > > > > 20 state changes, last state change 00:22:34 > > > > Ethernet1 - Group 2 > > > > Local state is Active, priority 200, may preempt > > > > Hellotime 3 holdtime 10 > > > > Next hello sent in 00:00:01.676 > > > > Hot standby IP address is 10.4.254.10 configured > > > > Active router is local > > > > Standby router is 10.4.254.1 expires in 00:00:08 > > > > Standby virtual mac address is 0000.0c07.ac02 > > > > 17 state changes, last state change 00:23:26 > > > > Router1# > > > > > > > > Router2#show standby > > > > Ethernet0 - Group 1 > > > > Local state is Active, priority 225, may preempt > > > > Hellotime 3 holdtime 10 > > > > Next hello sent in 00:00:01.010 > > > > Hot standby IP address is 10.3.0.2 configured > > > > Active router is local > > > > Standby router is 10.3.255.2 expires in 00:00:09 > > > > Standby virtual mac address is 0000.0c07.ac01 > > > > 24 state changes, last state change 00:22:04 > > > > Ethernet1 - Group 2 > > > > Local state is Standby, priority 150, may preempt > > > > Hellotime 3 holdtime 10 > > > > Next hello sent in 00:00:01.272 > > > > Hot standby IP address is 10.4.254.10 configured > > > > Active router is 10.4.254.2 expires in 00:00:09, > priority > > > 200 > > > > Standby router is local > > > > 32 state changes, last state change 00:22:25 > > > > Router2# > > Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=64748&t=64638 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
