dtlokee wrote: I like VRRP because you can use the same IP address that the interface already has as the virtual IP address where HSRP does not, you need to allocate an additional address. VRRP also already supports preemption (I know big deal, right?) where as HSRP needs it configured. Needing to cinfigure a tracked object instead of just specifying the interface to track is a bit more cumbersome though.
CCIE_2011 wrote: 2. The most important, VRRP have no tracking on interfaces as HSRP.
track 10 interface FastEthernet0/1 line-protocol interface fa0/0 vrrp 1 ip 10.10.10.1 vrrp 1 track 10 decrement 50
dtlokee wrote: CCIE_2011 wrote: 2. The most important, VRRP have no tracking on interfaces as HSRP. Not really true, you can create a tracked object then use that in the vrrp configuration.track 10 interface FastEthernet0/1 line-protocol interface fa0/0 vrrp 1 ip 10.10.10.1 vrrp 1 track 10 decrement 50
Paul Boz wrote: I actually like having a separate IP for HSRP but I've never had IP constraints so I'm sure I'm partially jaded by that.
cisco_trooper wrote: A Top Tier Wireless Carrier here....
Goldmember wrote: cisco_trooper wrote: A Top Tier Wireless Carrier here.... Telco's are know for their incompetence... I bet you the guys who track and assign IP's all day probably screw that up! haha
Paul Boz wrote: » Talking out of your ass is more incompetent than any telco that I'm associated with.
CCIE_2011 wrote: » My book didn't tell me this .... Thanks for the new information. Plus the correction
Grigsby wrote: » For the BCMSN, every question that I have studied DID say that VRRP could NOT track interfaces. I knew that to be wrong because the IOS I was running on my 3550 did allow me to track an inteface using VRRP. However, every time I listed this an answer I scored it incorrectly, and this was the Cisco Press material.