Резервирование L2 — различия между версиями
Moiseevvi (обсуждение | вклад) |
Moiseevvi (обсуждение | вклад) (→BFD) |
||
| Строка 4: | Строка 4: | ||
=UDLD= | =UDLD= | ||
=BFD= | =BFD= | ||
| − | + | =Fate Sharing= | |
| + | The underlying assumption is simple: if the routing protocol manages to exchange information between adjacent nodes, there won’t be any problems with the user traffic. Furthermore, if the routing protocol updates in a distance vector protocol made it from egress router to ingress router, the traffic should experience no problems when being sent in the reverse direction. | ||
| + | http://blog.ipspace.net/2014/08/fate-sharing-in-ip-networks.html | ||
[[категория:Лекции]] | [[категория:Лекции]] | ||
[[Категория:Сети]] | [[Категория:Сети]] | ||
[[Category:Cisco]] [[Category:NAT]] | [[Category:Cisco]] [[Category:NAT]] | ||
Версия 06:31, 21 октября 2014
LAG
LAcP
MLAG
UDLD
BFD
Fate Sharing
The underlying assumption is simple: if the routing protocol manages to exchange information between adjacent nodes, there won’t be any problems with the user traffic. Furthermore, if the routing protocol updates in a distance vector protocol made it from egress router to ingress router, the traffic should experience no problems when being sent in the reverse direction. http://blog.ipspace.net/2014/08/fate-sharing-in-ip-networks.html
