From: Waters, Kivas (UK72) (Kivas.Waters@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Mon Dec 24 2001 - 12:13:45 GMT-3
Hello Godwin, yes thanks, I found what I was looking for, finally, on the CD
as you said in your email.
This extract ... "The dlsw, rsrb, and stun keywords refer only to direct
encapsulation." is from the CD at ...
http://127.0.0.1:8080/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios113ed/113ed_cr/fun_r/frp
rt4/frperfrm.htm#19202
It seems that prioritising DLSw requires queuing by matching the following :
DLSw TCP encap - TCP ports 2065;1981;1982;1983
DLSw FST encap - IP port 91
DLSw Direct encap - priority queue with "dlsw" keyword
thanks
Ki
-----Original Message-----
From: Godwin Pang [mailto:gytpang@jos.com.hk]
Sent: 24 December 2001 02:48
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: RE: Custom queue-list for DLSW
Hi Group,
I have seen earily that the "dlsw" keyword is used for SNA traffic. But when
I check the CD, it said "the dlsw, rsrb, and stun keywords refer only to
direct encapsulation"
Is it mean that "dlsw" represent all dlsw traffics in direct encapsulation
while it represent SNA only in other encapsulation (eg FST)
Thanks,Godwin
>>> "Waters, Kivas (UK72)" <Kivas.Waters@Honeywell.com> 12/24 7:03 AM >>>
Hi Rich, I want to fully understand the use of the "dlsw" keyword when used
with custom/priority queuing but cannot find any info on CCO to help. Do
you have any URL's you could point me towards?
many thanks
Ki
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Gallagher [mailto:rgallagh@cisco.com]
Sent: 12 December 2001 16:13
To: David Vu; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: Custom queue-list for DLSW
David,
"dlsw" keyword is only for FST encapsulation, for TCP you need to specify
all
the ports involved.
Rich
CCIE #7211
On Dec 12, 9:38am, David Vu chatted about:
> Subject:Custom queue-list for DLSW
> In bootcamp lab 20, it asks you to do a custom queue with
>
> 50% on DLSW
> 25% on IP
> 25% on IPX
>
> For DLSW, the solution is
> access-list 101 permit tcp any eq 2065 any
> access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 2065
> access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 2067
> access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 1981
> access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 1982
> access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 1983
> queue-list 1 protocol ip 1 list 101
>
> Would it be easier to do "queue-list 1 protocol dlsw 1" instead of using
an
> access-list?
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jun 13 2002 - 10:32:47 GMT-3