Topology: two access switches, which presently are not trunked, and two access routers, each cross-connected, trunking dot1q vlans, to both switches. Pix fo pair, one pix connected to each switch.
So at any one time, one pix is active through one switch. It seems, that the ultimate redundancy would be derived by having a routable subinterface on each of the two router-switch trunks - i.e. two interfaces for each vlan on each router one connected to each switch.
If you have only one of the trunks carrying traffic on each router, e.g,accessrouter1-accessswitch2, accessrouter2-accessswitch1 if one switchand the router it's connected to for the given route fails, there is no path for the client.
Can you have more than two routable interfaces as members of the same standby group, and if so, is it advisable and what are the pitfalls? Is the hsrp part as straightforward as just giving each interface a different priority, say 100, 105, 110, 115? I know there are other issues that may crop up with the L2 part, regarding the interaction of spanning-tree and hsrpconvergence as well.