Keepalived - VIP on device different from one where VRRP instance configured - keepalived

Question

I have 2 VMs with Linux and keepalived installed. Their hostnames are master and slave. Each VM has 2 network interfaces configured for different subnets:
master:
eth1 - 192.168.1.101/24
eth2 - 192.168.56.101/24
slave:
eth1 - 192.168.1.102/24
eth2 - 192.168.56.102/24
On each node I configured one vrrp_instance using interface eth1:
vrrp_instance VI_1 {
...
interface eth1
...
}
And I assigned one VIP for each subnet - one per interface:
vrrp_instance VI_1 {
...
virtual_ipaddress {
192.168.1.250/32 dev eth1 label eth1:vip0
192.168.56.250/32 dev eth2 label eth2:vip0
}
...
}
So, whole configs are:
master:
vrrp_instance VI_1 {
state MASTER
interface eth1
virtual_router_id 1
priority 100
advert_int 1
authentication {
auth_type PASS
auth_pass HURRDURR
}
virtual_ipaddress {
192.168.1.250/32 dev eth1 label eth1:vip0
192.168.56.250/32 dev eth2 label eth2:vip0
}
}
slave:
vrrp_instance VI_1 {
state BACKUP
interface eth1
virtual_router_id 1
priority 99
advert_int 1
authentication {
auth_type PASS
auth_pass HURRDURR
}
virtual_ipaddress {
192.168.1.250/32 dev eth1 label eth1:vip0
192.168.56.250/32 dev eth2 label eth2:vip0
}
}
A question: could someone please tell me if there are pitfalls with a similar setup (on condition that VRRP multicast is allowed for the interface specified in option interface <interface name>).
As far as I understood, option interface <interface name> is used only for intercommunication between keepalived instances, and in fact, it specified which interface keepalived will use to send multicast traffic to negotiate which one should be a leader at the moment. And it should not affect configured VIPs (on condition that I configured them properly).

Answer 1

I realized at least one pitfall of a similar configuration. In case of network problems with interface eth2 on master server, VIP assigned on eth1 will not be moved to slave because VRRP instance configured via network on eth1 of both servers.
Therefore I think that a similar configuration is not recommended. VIP should be assigned to the same interface where VRRP instance was configured.
Correct configuration:
master:
vrrp_instance VI_1 {
state MASTER
interface eth1
virtual_router_id 1
priority 100
advert_int 1
authentication {
auth_type PASS
auth_pass HURRDURR
}
virtual_ipaddress {
192.168.1.250/32 dev eth1 label eth1:vip0
}
}
vrrp_instance VI_2 {
state MASTER
interface eth2
virtual_router_id 2
priority 100
advert_int 1
authentication {
auth_type PASS
auth_pass HURRDURR
}
virtual_ipaddress {
192.168.56.250/32 dev eth2 label eth2:vip0
}
}
slave:
vrrp_instance VI_1 {
state BACKUP
interface eth1
virtual_router_id 1
priority 99
advert_int 1
authentication {
auth_type PASS
auth_pass HURRDURR
}
virtual_ipaddress {
192.168.1.250/32 dev eth1 label eth1:vip0
}
}
vrrp_instance VI_2 {
state BACKUP
interface eth2
virtual_router_id 2
priority 99
advert_int 1
authentication {
auth_type PASS
auth_pass HURRDURR
}
virtual_ipaddress {
192.168.56.250/32 dev eth2 label eth2:vip0
}
}