First Hop Redundancy protocol comparison (HSRP,VRRP,GLBP)


Protocol
Features

HSRP

(Hot Standby Router protocol)

VRRP

(Virtual Redundancy Router Protocol)

GLBP

(Gateway Load Balancing Protocol)

Router role - 1 active router.- 1 standby router.- 1 or more listening routers. - 1 master router.- 1 or more backup routers. - 1 AVG (Active Virtual Gateway).- up to 4 AVF routers on the group (Active Virtual Forwarder) passing traffic.- up to 1024 virtual routers (GLBP groups) per physical interface.
- Use virtual ip address. - Can use real router ip address, if not, the one with highest priority become master. - Use virtual ip address.
Scope Cisco proprietary IEEE standard Cisco proprietary
Election Active Router:
1-Highest Priority
2-Highest IP (tiebreaker)
Master Router: (*)
1-Highest Priority
2-Highest IP (tiebreaker)
Active Virtual Gateway:
1-Highest Priority
2-Highest IP (tiebreaker)
Optimization features Tracking

yes

yes

yes

Preempt

yes

yes

yes

Timer adjustments

yes

yes

yes

Traffic type 224.0.0.2 – udp 1985 (version1)
224.0.0.102-udp 1985 (version2)
224.0.0.18 – IP 112 224.0.0.102 udp 3222
Timers Hello – 3 seconds Advertisement – 1 second Hello – 3 seconds
(Hold) 10 seconds (Master Down Interval)3 * Advertisement + skew time (Hold) 10 seconds
(Skew time)(256-priority) / 256
Load-balancing functionality - Multiple HSRP group per interface/SVI/routed int. - Multiple VRRP group per interface/SVI/routed int. Load-balancing oriented- Weighted algorithm.- Host-dependent algorithm.

- Round-Robin algorithm (default).

Requires appropriate distribution of Virtual GW IP per Clients for optimal load-balancing.(generally through DHCP) Requires appropriate distribution of Virtual GW IP per Clients for optimal load-balancing.(generally through DHCP) Clients are transparently updated with virtual MAC according to load-balancing algorithm through ARP requesting a unique virtual gateway.

* If the group VRRP Virtual IP on the master (higher priority) is the real IP configured on a different VRRP (Backup with lower priority) IOS will manage to make the VRRP router with the real IP, the master, by setting its priority to 255, knowing that the configurable range is [1-254].

About these ads

About ajnouri
Se vi deziras sekure komuniki eksterbloge, jen mia publika (GPG) ŝlosilo: My public key for secure secure communication: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x41CCDE1511DF0EB8

24 Responses to First Hop Redundancy protocol comparison (HSRP,VRRP,GLBP)

  1. Pingback: VRRP and Load Sharing « CCIE, the beginning!

  2. CarlProject says:

    Nice work buddy! I’m adding you on my favorite links.

    Regards,
    Carl
    CarlProject.com

  3. Pingback: GLBP (Gateway Load Balancing Protocol) « CCIE, the beginning!

  4. SALEM IDRI says:

    for managing voice and signalling links between MSS and MGW HUAWEI with 2 GIABIT ETHERNET, 2 PE and 2 NE40 Router:
    Wich is the best protocol to use to minimise the link switchover, VRRP or GLBP

    • cciethebeginning says:

      Hi Salem,
      GLBP is a Cisco proprietary protocol, which is not supported by Huawei, VRRP is standard protocol rfc3768, so for a mixed environments, configure VRRP with BFD for faster failure detection, you can also tune VRRP timer accordingly.
      Note the advanced VRRP timer design, namely skew timer, which gives the Backup router with the highest priority (lowest skew value) better chance to take over the master mode.
      Have a good design!

  5. Ravi says:

    Hi,
    I have some doubts.

    I understand from configuration that you have made R3 as primary with priority of 200.So, it will act as AVG & R2 will act as standby AVG with default priority of 100.

    I can see you have applied weight of 70 to R2 & 30 to R4.I have few questions in my mind

    1. Do we have to enable weighting? ( as default is round robin)
    Just read this command somewhere “glbp 10 load-balancing weighted ”

    2.In this scenario R3 is primary.But how will the load balance take place?
    Does a weighting of 70 to R2 mean that 70% of traffic will be diverted by AVG
    to v-mac of R2 & rest 30% to v-mac of R4?
    Does this mean that AVG in this case won’t forward any traffic by itself; i mean it won’t act as AVF?

    I know, it’s long list of question.Will appreciate you in helping me out

    Regards
    Ravi Kumar

  6. Ravi says:

    Sir,
    I am referring to GLBP configuration.

    Regards
    Ravi Kumar

    • cciethebeginning says:

      Hello Ravi,
      Sorry for the delay!
      - I believe the local proportion is relative to AVG value, weight of 30 is ~42% of weight of 70.
      - The command “glbp load-balancing weighted”
      is generally configured on AVG router to make the load balancing method persistent on that gateway, (will use only “weighted”)
      For example, if configure this command only on the AVG, and this last goes down, the standby AVG (next highest priority gateway) will fall back and dictate round-robin to all AVFs.
      - In addition to The AVG role of a dispatcher (treat ARP requests and allocate gateways according to the LB algorithm) the AVG will consider itself as an AVF and forward traffic too.

  7. Ravi says:

    Thanks!

  8. Kristof says:

    Hello Guys,

    This comparison led a little to confusion :
    In VRRP normally the first criterium to select the master router is the IP of the VRRP group. If one of the routers uses this IP on an interface where the GLBP group is configured on, it will be the master of the group. Priority or highest IP won’t be taken into account. Right?

    Cheers

    Kristof

  9. Kristof says:

    Sorry, replace GLBP by VRRP in my latest post … it should read “where the VRRP group is configured on, …”

    • cciethebeginning says:

      Hi Kristof,
      The 1st criterion looked up is the priority, otherwise the unicity of the IP addresses will make the difference.

  10. Kristof says:

    I’m sorry to say but have a look at below link :

    http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0st/12_0st18/feature/guide/st_vrrpx.html#wp1035078

    VRRP priority section.

    Thanks

    Kristof

  11. Kristof says:

    VRRP Router priority section.

    • cciethebeginning says:

      Hi Kristof,
      You are absolutely right and thank you for insisting to point it out.
      Indeed, it would be logically inconsistent to have the same IP address in different devices, the virtual VRRP gateway and the Gateway in which the real ip is configured.
      I 1st enabled VRRP virtual IP on a router (NOT the one configured with the physical IP) and the router started firing up “%IP-4-DUPADDR: Duplicate address 192.168.12.2 on FastEthernet0/0, sourced by 0000.5e00.010c “
      Duplicate IP
      And after including the router with the real IP in VRRP group with a lower priority “50″, IOS has ignored it and set its own priority of “255″ (configurable range [1-254]) to be bigger than the previously configured VRRP master :
      overrite priority
      But this is ONLY the case when a real IP address is used as virtual IP.
      Well done Kristoff.

  12. Kristof Vandenborn says:

    Hi cciethebeginning,

    No problem, I just wanted to make sure that what I learnt was right and therefore I researched a bit before commenting on your post. Apparently this priority criterion is not meant in the RFC describing VRRP. Seems to be a Cisco propietary thing :)

    Kind regards,

    Kristof

  13. Jason says:

    Great post. It would be nice if you pointed out the preempting defaults along with your note on preempt support:

    HSRP – yes (does not preempt by default)
    VRRP – yes (preempts by default; can be disabled)
    GLBP – yes (AVG does not preempt by default – requires “glbp preempt”; AVF preemption uses weighting instead of priority and is enabled by default with a default “glbp forwarder preempt delay” of 30 seconds)

  14. Pingback: Buy Guaranteed Facebook Fans

  15. Praveen says:

    can have net file of this complete lab very nice explain keep updated like this with new stuffs and net file as well

  16. Bilal says:

    There is a minor error where Traffic type for VRRP is mentioned in the article, it doesn’t use UDP 112 but IP Protocol number 112.

  17. cyruslab says:

    I was thinking if VRF lite can be used for VRRP as well….Your blog is very informative, I have added your blog to blogroll.

  18. Pingback: Starting CCIE Written. Just had "the talk" with Mrs. Zartan. - Page 5

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: