Cisco Support Community
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Announcements
Webcast-Catalyst9k
New Member

Track multiple routes in single statement for HSRP failover

Hello,

I have a point to multi-point Ethernet networdk on SDH backbone. The hub site needs to be working in primary-backup mode. But since the WAN interface is Ethernet, the line protocol will not go down if any remote site link fails and hence, the failover will not happen.

Is there any way to track multiple routes and then if one of them is not avilable via the primary link, the router selectively failover the traffic ONLY for that particular route onto the backup link?

2 ACCEPTED SOLUTIONS

Accepted Solutions
Gold

Re: Track multiple routes in single statement for HSRP failover

Sorta got distracted by the HSRP discussion and didn't read you question closely.

HSRP does little good if the primary and the secondary are on the same router.

Running a routing protocol on both the primary and backup links is your best option. I assume you can't do that is the reason for the question.

It is possible to use policy based routing based on the track options also. If you are talking about a lot of subnets it could get to be a pain to configure.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk364/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080211f5c.shtml

Hall of Fame Super Gold

Re: Track multiple routes in single statement for HSRP failover

I agree with Tim's point that HSRP is not the right answer for the issue described in the original post. But I come at it from a slightly different perspective. The original post described a point to multipoint environment and wants to fail over for a particular destination - but not all destinations - if that particular destination fails on the primary connection. But HSRP and track will fail the interface to the standby for ALL destinations if it fails for ANY destination.

I believe that we could give better answers if we understood the environment better. But given what we know now I agree with Tim that a dynamic routing protocol is likely to be a more satisfactory solution to the issue in the orignal post.

HTH

Rick

5 REPLIES
Blue

Re: Track multiple routes in single statement for HSRP failover

YES,

you can use the 'standby track ...' command in your hsrp group(s) to track multiple interfaces for their status.

(this would require multiple 'standby track' commands per hsrp group; this cannot be done in a single 'standby track' statement)

ie:

standby 1 ip 10.10.10.1

standby 1 priority 105

standby 1 preempt

standby 1 track vlan 987

standby 1 track vlan 985

if one of the interfaces becomes unavailable, HSRP can 'track' this and switch to the other route.

(replace vlan with an interface if thats what you need to track)

please see the following link for more HSRP tracking info:

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk648/tk362/technologies_tech_note09186a0080094e8c.shtml

New Member

Re: Track multiple routes in single statement for HSRP failover

Thanks for this. I am testing this on Cisco 7206 NPE-G1 but here I donot see any option to track the vlan. Is there some IOS version from which this feature is available. The options that I have are:

SAR3.LAB(config-subif)#standby 99 track ?

<1-500> Tracked object number

Async Async interface

BVI Bridge-Group Virtual Interface

CDMA-Ix CDMA Ix interface

CTunnel CTunnel interface

Dialer Dialer interface

GigabitEthernet GigabitEthernet IEEE 802.3z

Lex Lex interface

Loopback Loopback interface

MFR Multilink Frame Relay bundle interface

Multilink Multilink-group interface

Port-channel Ethernet Channel of interfaces

Serial Serial

Tunnel Tunnel interface

Vif PGM Multicast Host interface

Virtual-PPP Virtual PPP interface

Virtual-TokenRing Virtual TokenRing

XTagATM Extended Tag ATM interface

Gold

Re: Track multiple routes in single statement for HSRP failover

They changed it

Cisco IOS Release 12.2(15)T and Later Releases

standby [group-number] track object-number [decrement priority-decrement]

no standby [group-number] track object-number [decrement priority-decrement]

Cisco IOS Release 12.2(13)T and Earlier Releases

standby [group-number] track interface-type interface-number [interface-priority]

no standby [group-number] track interface-type interface-number [interface-priority]

You need to build a track object which of can track a interface. But I suspect in your case tracking the ethernet interface will not do any good.

It would be nice if you could directly track existiance of a route in the routing table like BGP conditional advertisement does but I have not seen that option.

You can sorta do that by building a tunnel interface that has the destination as something that is learned dynamically. I think the tunnel will go down if it loses the route and you can track the tunnel. Of course you could build a real tunnel and use keepalives on it.

The other options if you have very new IOS is

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/sw/iosswrel/ps5207/products_feature_guide09186a00801d2d74.html

Gold

Re: Track multiple routes in single statement for HSRP failover

Sorta got distracted by the HSRP discussion and didn't read you question closely.

HSRP does little good if the primary and the secondary are on the same router.

Running a routing protocol on both the primary and backup links is your best option. I assume you can't do that is the reason for the question.

It is possible to use policy based routing based on the track options also. If you are talking about a lot of subnets it could get to be a pain to configure.

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk364/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080211f5c.shtml

Hall of Fame Super Gold

Re: Track multiple routes in single statement for HSRP failover

I agree with Tim's point that HSRP is not the right answer for the issue described in the original post. But I come at it from a slightly different perspective. The original post described a point to multipoint environment and wants to fail over for a particular destination - but not all destinations - if that particular destination fails on the primary connection. But HSRP and track will fail the interface to the standby for ALL destinations if it fails for ANY destination.

I believe that we could give better answers if we understood the environment better. But given what we know now I agree with Tim that a dynamic routing protocol is likely to be a more satisfactory solution to the issue in the orignal post.

HTH

Rick

1757
Views
0
Helpful
5
Replies
CreatePlease to create content