<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: CSS Interface Redundancy in Application Networking</title>
    <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/227002#M3149</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Another way to account for this if your traffic volume allows, would be to trunk both/all of your circuits over a single physical interface.  I do this on one of my gigabit interfaces and it works well with VIP/Int redundancy.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2004 17:44:44 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>d.parks</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2004-03-02T17:44:44Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>CSS Interface Redundancy</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/226998#M3145</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Is it possible to configure interface redundancy so that if 1 interface on the master CSS fails, it fails over all interfaces configured on the master css, effectively failing over the whole box if there is an interface failure.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2004 15:42:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/226998#M3145</guid>
      <dc:creator>jmcglashan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-03-02T15:42:28Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: CSS Interface Redundancy</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/226999#M3146</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;If you are running box-to-box redundancy, you can apply the "redundancy-phy" command to the interfaces that you'd like to trigger a failover.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If you are running vip/interface redundancy, the redundancy-phy command does not apply.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2004 16:21:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/226999#M3146</guid>
      <dc:creator>d.parks</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-03-02T16:21:00Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: CSS Interface Redundancy</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/227000#M3147</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are not running box to box redundancy, We are using virtual routers, we would like to failover all interfaces if one should fail.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2004 16:58:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/227000#M3147</guid>
      <dc:creator>jmcglashan</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-03-02T16:58:23Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: CSS Interface Redundancy</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/227001#M3148</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;This concept of failing over all virtual routers when a single fails is what is referred to as "fate sharing".  Typically it is done by configuring identical critical services to all virtual routers on a CSS.  This is sufficient for the vast majority of installations.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;There are some rare situations where this will not be the best solution.  In software version 7.3 a new feature called "VRID Peering" was introduced.  You can tie multiple routers together so they are bound.  This would be similiar to HSRP tracking on a Cisco router.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You can read about fate sharing at the following link:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/webscale/css/css_730/redundgd/vipredun.htm#1063408" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/webscale/css/css_730/redundgd/vipredun.htm#1063408&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;You can read about VRID Peering at the following link:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A class="jive-link-custom" href="http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/webscale/css/css_730/redundgd/vipredun.htm#1109382" target="_blank"&gt;http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/webscale/css/css_730/redundgd/vipredun.htm#1109382&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hope this helps...&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;-Steve&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2004 17:12:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/227001#M3148</guid>
      <dc:creator>stevehall</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-03-02T17:12:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: CSS Interface Redundancy</title>
      <link>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/227002#M3149</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Another way to account for this if your traffic volume allows, would be to trunk both/all of your circuits over a single physical interface.  I do this on one of my gigabit interfaces and it works well with VIP/Int redundancy.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Mar 2004 17:44:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.cisco.com/t5/application-networking/css-interface-redundancy/m-p/227002#M3149</guid>
      <dc:creator>d.parks</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2004-03-02T17:44:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

