While I admit it's not the cleanest arrangement, I don't see any reason it would not work. However, on XR 5.1.2 (w/ sp1), it appears broken:
RP/0/RSP0/CPU0:node0#show hsrp brief IPv4 Groups: P indicates configured to preempt. | Interface Grp Pri P State Active addr Standby addr Group addr BE20.2238 2238 sla Init unknown unknown 220.127.116.11 BE20.2810 2 120 P Active local 18.104.22.168 22.214.171.124
yeah this won't work. well you can make it work, but the solution is horrific. you need to add static arp entries for all those destinations off the unnumbered.
currently the cef adj is not resolved, because theoretically the destination can exist on any interface that leverages that unnumbered. In IOS, arp would blast out a request on all interfaces trying to get a destination, which was not fancy either. in XR we limited that behavior whereby we expect a static arp entry tied to the interface so we know or effectively can send targeted requests.
along with HSRP, yeah makes the situation a bit more nasty.
the other crux is, you specify the interface to be point to point, otherwise you cant do unnumbered, and then there is effectively a point to multipoint scenario.
best to fix the addr and not unnumber it.
if you need to aggregate multiple interfaces together in an L3 env like this, then consider the BD with a BVI and pull in all AC's into that BD.
then the BD will manage the mac situation, and BVI provides you that routing endpoint.
I'd hoped the static route at an interface would be enough of a hint for ARP.
I assume BD means bridge domain, which means all those AC has visibility to each other. That's not desirable.
The real driver, however, is moving existing links built on /30 subnets into an arrangement where HSRP is providing redundancy for the L3 gateway service without having to renumber. Do you have any ideas on for that?
the static route tied to an interface will resolve the recursion, that is correct, but I dont think that HSRP is going to like that still. that is the nasty dependency here.
if you want to entertain the BD approach, you could put the AC's in a split horizon group so they can't speak with each other, but only with the gateway. something like the "promiscuous" vs "private" port thing that c6k used to have at the time with pvlans.
I dont have the full picture as to what the problem is you're trying to resolve, but I think there may be some options.
Node A connects a number of customers with DS1 circuits, using /30 subnets across various IP allocations.
The customers are migrating to metro Ethernet connections. When this happens, the customer is on a unique VLAN (or QinQ VLAN pair), which contains the customer's router, and our nodes B and C.
I'm hoping there's a solution that allows us to run HSRP between B and C, without the customer having to renumber his router. I know I can do this with VRRP, but I don't see that as well supported on the ASR9ks.
few options you have; both hsrp and vrrp can be used here, but for both options the subnet needs to be larger then a /30. this so we can put 2 adds on the phy access interface and use one for the virtual ip address. so there will be some renumbering in play here on the cpe side.
Another option is I see you're using bundle. You could use MCLAG, putting bundle members on each node, share the address between both sides, no renumbering necessary and MCLAG will handle which member (set) is active on what node.
depending on whether you can renumber the CPE, HSRP/VRRP is a more simpler option then MCLAG I guess, and MCLAG requires the introduction of another protocol (ICCP, to comm state between the POA's/point of attachment, the bundle masters).
the unnumbered you're doing here requires a lot of funkiness and routes etc and hsrp/vrrp is not going to like that.
1. Introduction Internet security is important with the increasing
attacks that are happening every day. Many internet and browsing
security solutions exist, but some are not very easy to use or maybe the
question is how can I enable them? In this referen...
Cisco Software Manager Server API Guide This document describes the
programmatic interfaces, RESTful APIs, which are supported by Cisco
Software Manager Server (CSM Server). Overview CSM Server supports a set
of finite RESTful APIs. The first step to use ...
If you are using Cisco's new linux-based Cisco Software Manager server,
then you probably want to make sure there is a startup service for
it.I'll assume that you've already installed the CSM server on a
systemd-based linux system. The commands given belo...