From: Charles Johnson (cjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Feb 07 2001 - 15:40:20 GMT-3
Speaking of zeros, there is an IXP example in both
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios111/cc111/car.ht
m#xtocid255427
and
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios120/12cgcr/qos_c
/qcpart1/qccar.htm
(watch the wrap)
that claims to set a limit of 80 Mbps, but lists the bps as 800000000 (note
8 zeros, not 7).
Can someone either confirm that that is a typo or explain why that example
has an extra zero?
When you're struggling to understand CAR, it doesn't take much to throw you
off. The router clearly accepted the input, because it shows up in the show
commands of the same doc, but does it really mean 80 Mbps?
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael E. Flannagan [mailto:mflannag@cisco.com]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 9:55 AM
To: David Goldsmith
Cc: Robert DeVito; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: CAR question
Dave is exactly right...I love zeros - just got carried away :-)
Sorry for the confusion.
------------------------------------------------------------
C i s c o S y s t e m s Michael E. Flannagan
| | Network Consulting Engineer
||| ||| Research Triangle Park, NC
||||||| ||||||| (919) 392-4550
.:|||||||||||:.:|||||||||||:. mflannag@cisco.com
------------------------------------------------------------
On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, David Goldsmith wrote:
> Group,
>
> Actually, that is incorrect. This would allow 3mega bits for the first
number
> and 3.6 mega bits for the burst.
>
> the second number is in bytes. This statement will allow 6.6 M bits
through.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave
>
>
> "Michael E. Flannagan" wrote:
>
> > Robert -
> >
> > Look at it this way. 1st number + 2nd number = where your action begins
> > to be selectively applied to traffic (in this case, the action is
> > 'drop'). The 3rd number is the point beyond which the exceed-action
will
> > be applied to ALL traffic. If you truly wanted to limit traffic to not
> > exceed 3.5Mb, then you would want to make sure that rate+Eb = 3.5Mb
> >
> > ex: rate-limit input access-group 101 3000000 450000 500000
conform-action
> > transmit exceed-action drop
> >
> > That would allow up to 3.45Mb of traffic before any action was taken and
> > would drop *some* traffic between 3.45Mb and 3.5Mb, but would drop all
> > traffic over 3.5Mb.
> >
> > Hope that helps,
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > C i s c o S y s t e m s Michael E. Flannagan
> > | | Network Consulting Engineer
> > ||| ||| Research Triangle Park, NC
> > ||||||| ||||||| (919) 392-4550
> > .:|||||||||||:.:|||||||||||:. mflannag@cisco.com
> > ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Robert DeVito wrote:
> >
> > > If I wanted to limit SMTP to 3.5 MB on my ethernet port I would do the
> > > following?
> > >
> > > rate-limit input access-group 101 3500000 8000 8000 conform-action
transmit
> > > exceed-limit drop
> > > !
> > > access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq smtp
> > >
> > > My question is, when configuring CAR, it requires me to add the bps
> > > burst-normal and burst-max. If I came across an scenario when it ask
me to
> > > limit bandwidth to a specific protocol, in this case smtp, to 3.5mbs,
if I
> > > configure it to burst 8k, I am really not limiting it to 3.5mbs. Am I
> > > thinking correctly? Is there a different way of doing this?
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > RobertRobert DeVito
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:28:40 GMT-3