VRRP and EVPN Virtual Gateway are features used while creating mult-router local gateway redundancy on a single "LAN",
The shared ip address used on this gateway pair is then owned by all the routers in the pair.
In the current implementation of new zino2, these adresses will move between the routers each time a router is "rediscovered"
In normal circumstances a router will never source any traffic from this virtual ip address
An example of this is following under here:
(Anonymized data)
--> $ cat log | grep -i "home of" | cut -c 66- | sort | uniq -c
336 Home of 10.0.254.10 changed from router-gw1 to router-gw2
335 Home of 10.0.254.10 changed from router-gw2 to router-gw1
336 Home of 10.0.254.114 changed from router-gw1 to router-gw2
335 Home of 10.0.254.114 changed from router-gw2 to router-gw1
885 Home of 10.0.254.138 changed from router-gw1 to router-gw2
886 Home of 10.0.254.138 changed from router-gw2 to router-gw1
370 Home of 10.0.254.179 changed from router-gw1 to router-gw2
371 Home of 10.0.254.179 changed from router-gw2 to router-gw1
Is it possible to ignore these "virtual" ip adresses, or allow them to exist on both routers at the same time?
(This is just one of several reasons for these type of messages in our network, and i'm investigating more instances of it)
VRRP and EVPN Virtual Gateway are features used while creating mult-router local gateway redundancy on a single "LAN", The shared ip address used on this gateway pair is then owned by all the routers in the pair. In the current implementation of new zino2, these adresses will move between the routers each time a router is "rediscovered" In normal circumstances a router will never source any traffic from this virtual ip address An example of this is following under here:
Is it possible to ignore these "virtual" ip adresses, or allow them to exist on both routers at the same time?
(This is just one of several reasons for these type of messages in our network, and i'm investigating more instances of it)