From: Justin Menga (Justin.Menga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Jan 22 2001 - 19:22:40 GMT-3
I would say it is best to use CAR - GTS will buffer and attempt to smooth
the traffic to the lower rate. Since we are talking about TCP-based HTTP,
straight out drops via CAR will leave the flow control to the endpoints of
the TCP connection - rather than using resources on the router.
Regards,
Justin Menga CCIE #6640 MCSE+I CCSE
WAN Specialist
Computerland New Zealand
PO Box 3631, Auckland
DDI: (+64) 9 360 4864 Mobile: (+64) 25 349 599
mailto: justin.menga@computerland.co.nz
-----Original Message-----
From: Desyatnik, Yan [mailto:Yan.Desyatnik@usi.net]
Sent: Tuesday, 23 January 2001 4:46 a.m.
To: 'Wayne Hu'; Lab Guy; ccie
Subject: RE: custom queuing
The simplest solution is to do GTS
-----Original Message-----
From: Wayne Hu [mailto:wayneccie@yahoo.com]
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 10:34 AM
To: Lab Guy; ccie
Subject: RE: custom queuing
I think you should use CAR
rate-limit input access-group 100 .............
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On
Behalf Of
Lab Guy
Sent: Monday, January 22, 2001 9:59 AM
To: ccie
Subject: custom queuing
Would this limit www traffic to 2.5 meg on my ethernet
interface?
queue-list 1 protocol ip 1 list 100
queue-list 1 queue 1 byte-count 2500000
queue-list 1 default 2
int e0
custom-queue-list 1
access-list 100 permit tcp any any eq www
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:27:39 GMT-3