Home page logo
/

nanog logo nanog mailing list archives

Re: HSRP vs VRRP for IPv6 on IOS-XE - rekindling an old flame
From: -Hammer- <bhmccie () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2012 16:26:07 -0500

It's a good argument Owen. Unfortunately it looks like VRRP is not an available feature on the ASR for IPv6 FHRP. I'm still trying to confirm it but it is definitely not configurable in my version of code and if it's "just coming out" in a "new release" there is no way I'm jumping in with both feet. I'll have to stick with HSRP and LL addressing. If anyone knows different please let me know. Thanks

PS: Yes, I still have some ISL. :( On legacy environments only though. I promise. Nothing new in years...

-Hammer-

"I was a normal American nerd"
-Jack Herer

On 8/20/2012 3:31 PM, Owen DeLong wrote:
VRRP is to HSRP what 802.1q is to ISL...

I highly recommend using VRRP instead of HSRP because:

1.      It is a more robust protocol
2.      It is vendor agnostic
3.      Being vendor agnostic it is more likely to have a continuing future.

Does anyone still use ISL?

Owen

On Aug 20, 2012, at 13:10 , sthaug () nethelp no wrote:

Yeah I see the disconnect. I'm assuming that what I see is what I get.
Which means I'm going to stick with HSRP. If our AS team gives me any
good feedback that I can share I will do so. Thanks Nick.

XE: v4: HSRPv1, HSRPv2, VRRP                v6: HSRPv2
Not particularly relevant to the original question - however, I'd like
to mention that we've been using IPv6 VRRP on our Juniper routers for
well over a year. No particular problems so far.

Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug () nethelp no





  By Date           By Thread  

Current thread:
[ Nmap | Sec Tools | Mailing Lists | Site News | About/Contact | Advertising | Privacy ]