%% You should probably cite draft-ietf-vrrp-unified-spec instead of this I-D. @techreport{nadas-vrrp-unified-spec-01, number = {draft-nadas-vrrp-unified-spec-01}, type = {Internet-Draft}, institution = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, publisher = {Internet Engineering Task Force}, note = {Work in Progress}, url = {https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-nadas-vrrp-unified-spec/01/}, author = {Stephen Nadas}, title = {{Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol Version 3 for IPv4 and IPv6}}, pagetotal = 41, year = 2007, month = oct, day = 17, abstract = {This memo defines the Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP) for IPv4 and IPv6. It is version three (3) of the protocol and it is based on VRRP (version 2) for IPv4 that is defined in RFC 3768 and on draft-ieft-vrrp-ipv6-spec-08.txt. VRRP specifies an election protocol that dynamically assigns responsibility for a virtual router to one of the VRRP routers on a LAN. The VRRP router controlling the IPv4 or IPv6 address(es) associated with a virtual router is called the Master, and forwards packets sent to these IPv4 or IPv6 addresses. VRRP Master routers are configured with virtual IPv4 or IPv6 addresses and VRRP Backup routers infer the address family of the virtual addresses being carried based on the transport protocol. Within a VRRP router the virtual routers in each of the IPv4 and IPv6 address families are a domain unto themselves and do not overlap. The election process provides dynamic fail over in the forwarding responsibility should the Master become unavailable. For IPv4, the advantage gained from using VRRP is a higher availability default path without requiring configuration of dynamic routing or router discovery protocols on every end-host. For IPv6, the advantage gained from using VRRP for IPv6 is a quicker switch over to back up routers than can be obtained with standard IPv6 Neighbor Discover (RFC 2461) mechanisms.}, }