We just did a test at our clients' site with WAN Failover, WAN Balancer & VRRP all meshing together.
In the course of our testing WAN Failover, we unplugged the Primary WAN connection on the master UTM (VRRP Master). Although we were expecting everything to continue working through this UTM and to simply see it switch over from the primary WAN to the secondary WAN (WAN Failover), instead, VRRP switched over to the other UTM. Of course this is because the physical interface got unplugged and so the VRRP peer UTM promoted itself to master.
This is not a deal breaker. There is still value to having all of these working together, as they provide multiple levels of redundancy in different ways.
But I just wanted to draw light to the fact that VRRP will potentially mess up your WAN Failover design. Or perhaps in a less-negative way, I would say that it alters the behavior. I guess technically it would be fair to say that VRRP supersedes WAN Failover.
Does this sound correct to you guys? It makes sense to me, but I just wanted to bounce it off of this group to make sure we are understanding correctly.
Thanks!
In the course of our testing WAN Failover, we unplugged the Primary WAN connection on the master UTM (VRRP Master). Although we were expecting everything to continue working through this UTM and to simply see it switch over from the primary WAN to the secondary WAN (WAN Failover), instead, VRRP switched over to the other UTM. Of course this is because the physical interface got unplugged and so the VRRP peer UTM promoted itself to master.
This is not a deal breaker. There is still value to having all of these working together, as they provide multiple levels of redundancy in different ways.
But I just wanted to draw light to the fact that VRRP will potentially mess up your WAN Failover design. Or perhaps in a less-negative way, I would say that it alters the behavior. I guess technically it would be fair to say that VRRP supersedes WAN Failover.
Does this sound correct to you guys? It makes sense to me, but I just wanted to bounce it off of this group to make sure we are understanding correctly.
Thanks!