Re: VRRPv3 Implementation Report

Don,

The simplest requirement is "PING" that used to test the connectivity 
of the gateway by the end user or network operator.

When the VRRP is implemented, the network is mostly stable, the 
VR switchover is short and unusually. So the operator can take VRRP
 IP when he only need a simply operator such as looking at routing
 table or cpu usage of the Master router.

A new requirement of VRRP IP is TUNNEL. We can use the VRRP
IP as the source of TUNNEL, so that the peer node couldn't see the 
switchover. We also know that the packet must be sent to the IP Stack
in TUNNEL forward for encapsulation or decapsulation.

Lin.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "don provan" <[email protected]>
To: "'Lin Tao'" <[email protected]>; "'Mukesh Gupta'" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 2:45 AM
Subject: RE: [VRRP] VRRPv3 Implementation Report


>> FYI: The requirement of VRRP IP's operation is really offered 
>> by our customer. There are layers management of network.
> 
> Lin,
> 
> Perhaps you should tell us more about this requirement, then.
> The management techniques I've seen over the years always
> involve managing physical nodes to insure they are operating
> as expected or accessing services to make sure they are
> performing correctly. In VRRP, the former is accomplished
> by using an address actually owned by the box, and the latter
> is accomplished by confirming that packet forwarding is
> operating *through* the box, perhaps by pinging or otherwise
> accessing *an external* address.
> 
> You apparently are seeing a third possibility revealed by
> VRRP that involves accessing a virtual node for reasons
> *other* than using the virtual service it is providing,
> so I think it's important for us to all understand the
> requirement that calls for that.
> 
> -don
_______________________________________________
vrrp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vrrp