Re: [nanog] Cisco GLBP/HSRP question -- Has it ever been dis

[Grant Taylor via NANOG <nanog () nanog org>]

On 8/5/19 9:19 AM, Nicolas Chabbey wrote:
> Are there any good reasons of using proprietary FHRPs like HSRP and 
> GLBP over VRRP ?

I thought that GLBP had functionality that allowed both participants to 
be active/active.  I.e. you could cause ⅔ of traffic to go to one GLBP 
peer and the remaining ⅓ go to the other GLBP peer.

It's my understanding that neither HSRP nor VRRP support this 
active/active operation and that they are purely active/passive.

Sure, you can have multiple HSRP / VRRP IPs and spread the load via 
client configuration.  But that's outside of the scope of the protocols 
themselves.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature