This document analyzes and compares first hop redundancy protocols (FHRPs) including HSRP, VRRP, and GLBP, focusing on their effectiveness in reducing packet loss and enhancing network availability. The study evaluates each protocol based on parameters such as packet size, CPU utilization, convergence duration, and bandwidth usage, concluding that GLBP outperforms both HSRP and VRRP. Recommendations for selecting the most suitable redundancy protocol based on network stability and load balancing are also provided.

1. Performance Analysis and Functionality
Comparison of FHRP Protocols
BY:
USMAN ANWAR
North China Electric Power University
School of Control and Computer Engineering
2019年6月14日

2. Study Contents
 Introduction
 Research Purpose
 First hope redundancy protocols
 Results And Discussions
 Conclusion

3. Study Contents
 Introduction
 Research Purpose
 First hope redundancy protocols
 Results And Discussions
 Conclusion

4.  Every field requires high availability of network with the least probability of
data loss. Therefore, redundancy should be involved as much as possible for
network design.
the high availability of network necessitates higher managerial and operational
cost. Redundancy protocols substantially help to solve the problem.
 First Hop Redundancy Protocols (FHRPs) are implemented to overcome traffic
loss from source to destination in network communications.
 The FHRPs include three protocols:
 Hot Standby Router Protocol (HSRP)
 Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP)
 Gateway Load Balancing Protocol (GLBP).
Introduction

5.  The comprehensive data of the protocols, their working and comparison
between them. The comparison indicates that which protocol is best in which
scenario and which is best among the three protocols. These protocols work on
layer 3 devices that are on the Transport layer.
Cont…

6. Study Contents
 Introduction
 Research Purpose
 First hope redundancy protocols
 Results And Discussions
 Conclusion

7.  Evaluate FHRP using GNS3 simulator to deal with the necessity of redundancy in
networks
 Minimizing the packet loss in network communications by FHRP.
Research Purpose

8. Study Contents
 Introduction
 Research Purpose
 First hope redundancy protocols
 Results And Discussions
 Conclusion

9. First Hop Redundancy Protocol cont…
 Ability of a network to dynamically recover
from the failure of a device acting as a default
gateway is known as first-hop redundancy.
 First Hop Redundancy Protocols (FHRP) is a
collection of protocols that permit a
secondary gateway to take over all the
responsibilities of primary default gateway
router if it fails

10. First Hope Redundancy Protocol cont…
FHRP
GLBP
VRRP
HSRP

11. First Hope Redundancy Protocol cont…
Hot Standby Router Protocol (HSRP)
 An actor that communicates through network has an
HSRP protocol configured.
 there are two paths, one to be chosen for the transfer
of the traffic.
 will choose that path which will have the highest
priority and is active at that time
Choose path by
priority
Hello
text
R1
(Active)
R2
standby
Hold time= R2
will wait for the
hello message for
10 sec, if message
is not received, so
R2 will become
active.
HSRP
Preempt
enable
R1 ups
again
Preempt
disable
Hold time
10 sec
R3
If
Exceeded
from 10, so
R2 will be
activated
Hold time= R1 sends
message after 3 sec to R2
that he is active router.
Check the hold time
R1
Is not capable to be active
If preemption is
enbaled
If preemption is
disbaled
R1 will
Active again
Choose path by
priority
Hello
text
R4
(Active)
R5
standby
HSRP
Preempt
enable
R4 ups
again
Preempt
disable
Hold time
10 sec
R3
If
Exceeded
from 10, so
R2 will be
activated
Check the hold time
If preemption is
enbaled
If preemption is
disbaled
R4 will
Active again
R5 will be still active

12. First Hope Redundancy Protocol cont…
Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol
(VRRP)
 An actor wants to communicate with the other actor
over the network on which VRRP is configured.
 chooses path from available paths. R1 is the active
router has the highest priority traffic will be
forwarded through this router to R3. If the Router1
is not active at that time so the VRRP protocol will
transfer the traffic through Router2.
VRRP
Choose path by
priority
Advertisement
interval 1 sec by
default
R1 ups
again
R3
R1
(Active)
R2
(backup)
Advertisement interval= The
message send to the backup router
that the other router is active.
If no advertisement
received then R2 will
be activated.
R1 will be
active
Sends
advertisement
to R2
VRRP
Choose path by
priority
Advertisement
interval 1 sec by
default
R4 ups
again
R3
R4
(Active)
R5
(backup)
If no advertisement
received then R5 will
be activated.
R4 will be
active
Sends
advertisement
to R5
Preemtion is enabled by
default

13. First Hope Redundancy Protocol cont…
Gateway Load Balancing Protocol (GLBP)
 The GLBP is configured on the network so if an actor
wants to communicate with the other actor.
 Router 1 is active and Router 2 is the standby router at
the same time both routers can send the traffic to
achieve the load balancing.

14. Study Contents
 Introduction
 Research Purpose
 First hope redundancy protocols
 Results And Discussions
 Conclusion

15. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Protocols Packet
Size
CPU
utilization
(%)
Convergence
duration
[second]
Bandwidth
Utilization
[Kbps]
HSRP 100 0.69 8.056 0-1
VRRP 68 1.06 9.934 0-1
GLBP 108 0.54 7.344 0-1
Comparison of HSRP, VRRP and GLBP by using default values of hold
time, priority, preempt and ‘Hello’ time.

16. COMPARISION RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Protocols Packet
Size
CPU
utilization
(%)
Convergenc
e duration
[Sec.]
Bandwidth
Utilization
[Kbps]
HSRP 100 1.78 3.564 0-3
VRRP 68 2.15 7.935 0-3
GLBP 108 1.62 2.983 0-3
Test was performed by setting priority value 215, hold time to 6
seconds and rest to be the same.

17. Comparison of HSRP, VRRP and GLBP
Features/ VRRP HSRP GLBP
Timers Advertisement 1 sec
Master down
Interval 3 sec
Hello: 3sec
Hold:10 sec
Hello 3 sec, hold 10 sec
Type of Traffic 224.0.0.18 –UDP
112
224.0.0.10
2-udp
224.0.0.10
2- UDP 3222
Election Leading priority
leading IP, master
router
Active router,
leading priority,
lofty IP
Active Virtual Gateway
lofty priority, eminent IP
Standard IEEE Cisco Cisco
Router Role Solitary master
router and at least
one backup
gateways
Single active and
single standby router
and one or more
listening router
One AVG gateway and
up to 4 AVF routers on
the group

18. COMPARISION RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Packet loss in GLBP Packet loss in
HSRP
Packet loss in
VRRP
comparing HSRP VRRP GLBP
Packet loss 3 1 0.1

19. Study Contents
 Introduction
 Research Purpose
 First hope redundancy protocols
 Results And Discussions
 Conclusion

20. Conclusion cont..
 After a detailed review of these protocols, we have concluded that GLBP
outperforms HSRP and VRRP. It utilizes available resources more
effectively than the other two protocols.
 When I consider the stability of networks or load balancing, GLBP gives the
required provisions.
 These results are so essential for choosing the best suitable redundancy
protocol even when our network goes large.
 FHRPs provide cheaper and simple redundancy features for networks

21. Conclusion
 I have compared these protocols according to some useful parameters like
bandwidth consumption, CPU utilization and convergence time.