From: Erhan Kurt (kurt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Tue Jul 02 2002 - 08:13:08 GMT-3
Look at the URLs for overview! Well, it's also open in exam :)
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_
c/qcprt2/qcdconmg.htm
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios121/121cgcr/qos_
c/qcprt4/qcdpolsh.htm
-----Original Message-----
From: William Wong Kun Sing [mailto:wong_kunsing@solsis-eso.com.my]
Sent: 02 Temmuz 2002 Sal} 13:27
To: 'Colin Barber'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: CAR vs CBWFQ
CAR is basically used for the traffic policing which to prevent the global
sync (TCP slow start behaviour waste the bandwidth) so that the bandwidth
will be fully utilised. CAR will not shape the traffic which is done by GTS
or FRTS or what we call as traffic shaping.
CBWFQ is a Congestion Management Tool which do the scheduling of packet
forwarding. Yes, car is for ip only at the moment.
-----Original Message-----
From: Colin Barber [mailto:Colin.Barber@telewest.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2002 3:49 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: CAR vs CBWFQ
I think CAR always 'shapes' your traffic as you defined. CBWFQ only 'shapes'
when there is congestion and therefore is more bandwidth efficient.
Also does CAR only support IP?
Colin.
-----Original Message-----
From: Ted Richmond [mailto:rich_ted@yahoo.com]
Sent: 02 July 2002 07:52
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: CAR vs CBWFQ
I am totally confused now!!!
Can someone tell me when to use CAR / CBWFQ. Looks
like both can be used to allocate bandwidth to
different connections.
Thanks.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:17 GMT-3