Talk:Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Networking task force (assessed as Low-importance).

How can one redirect this article to Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol I think that would be a more appropriate name

Is this protocol provably covered by a patent?

The introductory text in the Article unambiguously states that VRRP is "patented and licensed", as if this were a fact.

However, according to the only cited reference, Cisco's "definitive statement" of March 20, 1998 is not so definitive. It merely says that the protocol: "would likely infringe on Cisco's patent #5,473,599". And even if Cisco had made a more forceful assertion (as it did informally a year previous to that "definitive statement"), that would simply be one company's not-so-objective opinion and certainly not something that deserved being restated as a fact in an encyclopedic entry.

So I am going to insert the word "allegedly" to indicate the subjective status of this patent assertion. Rahul (talk) 00:38, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I like your suggestion and have changed the wording to identify Cisco specifically as the one questioning, and ask for clarification on this. —fudoreaper (talk) 06:46, 25 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Skew Timer Value

On 27th of August 2012 79.45.123.35 added the Skew Timer formula to the Master Election section, noting that this is counted in milliseconds. That is of course meant to be seconds rather than milliseconds as per RFC 3768. RFC 5798 (VRRPv3) has a slightly more elaborate Skew Timer calculated in centiseconds and taking into account the master advertisement interval. So far as there are no objections, I intend to correct the mistake and possibly add description of the enhanced skew timer in VRRPv3. Comments are welcome.

92.108.58.67 (talk) 21:00, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

VRRP kernel ethtool

Note the user-space ethtool should not be confused with VRRP kernel ethtool. Disambiguation needed? 167.98.51.116 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:14, 20 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Master/Backup & Active/Standby distinction

Looking at RFC 5798, it seems like the distinction between routers in control within a given address space, and the routers that monitor it, and are given routing power in the event of something going wrong, are given the names "Master" Router and "Backup" Router. Not Primary/Active and Secondary/Standby, as this article says.

The words "Primary," "Active," "Secondary," and "Standby" appear only 13 times in the RFC, while the words "Master" & "Backup" appear 191 times.

I'm not sure if there's a reason for the inaccurate vocabulary, but I thought I'd point it out here, in case there was an explanation I was missing. Panisetcircenses (talk) 15:23, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I believe earlier versions of the standard referred to them as "master" and "slave", but this was changed recently to "primary" and "secondary". Here, it would probably be acceptable to call it "primary" and "secondary", and include the former names with a citation. guninvalid (talk) 18:13, 24 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]