From: elping (elpingu@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Jul 06 2002 - 17:24:01 GMT-3
you are right...jonh corrcted me offline...
forgot to multiply by 1.5
I did say "please correct any mistakes"...
thanks
"Narvaez, Pablo" wrote:
> hey, I agree with you in the calculation but ummmmm the result ? i might be w
rong or even missing something that's why i would like to clarify this:
>
> normal burst = CIR * 1/8 * 1.5
>
> this is:
>
> nb = 3000000/8 * 1.5
> nb = 562500 bytes
>
> cir = bits
> bc/be = bytes
>
> so, for me this should be like:
>
> interface FastEthernet0/0
> ip address 192.168.1.34 255.255.255.255
> rate-limit output access-group 101 3000000 562500 562500 conform-action cont
inue exceed-action drop
>
> I would like to know why my calculation is wrong or my numbers are bad or eve
n my logic is nor pretty good tooday hehehehe.
>
> Cheers !!
>
> hockito
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: elping [mailto:elpingu@acedsl.com]
> Sent: Sabado, 06 de Julio de 2002 02:49 p.m.
> To: John White
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Dlsw queueing methods
>
> ok...le me give it a shot.....please correct any mistakes
> .
> since the question asks allow dlsw 30% only lets's use CAR..
> total speed 10megbits
> allow 3mbits for dlsw
>
> normal burst= CIR [bps] * (1 byte)/(8 bits) * 1.5 seconds
> settting normal burst = BE disables bursting
>
> interface FastEthernet0/0
> ip address 192.168.1.34 255.255.255.255
> rate-limit output access-group 101 3000000 375000 375000 conform-action
> continue exceed-action drop
> duplex half
> speed 10
>
> access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 2065
>
> John White wrote:
>
> > That's fine. But which queueing method would you use, to restirict dlsw to
> > certain maximum bandwith? Is it custom queueing or policing-CAR. I'm really
> > confused on issue
> > Jan
> >
> > >From: elping <elpingu@acedsl.com>
> > >Reply-To: elping <elpingu@acedsl.com>
> > >To: John White <jan_white7@hotmail.com>
> > >CC: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > >Subject: Re: Dlsw queueing methods
> > >Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2002 11:56:41 -0400
> > >
> > >I was confused by this as well:
> > >to make it simple use
> > >
> > >only spcify port 2065 for dlsw...
> > >
> > >the other ports are used if you used priority
> > >
> > >John White wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi guys,
> > > > I'm new to the group, so I started browsing archives recently. There is
> > >a
> > > > lot good stuff there.Some questions though seems to never recive
> > >answers.I
> > > > guess people use their privite e-mail accounts, instead of list.I notic
e
> > >,
> > > > that in May 2002 there was discusion going on regarding bandwith
> > >allocation
> > > > for DLSw . The question was which method to use in order to allocate
> > >DlSw no
> > > > more than 30% of interface bandwith. (token or ehternet). Is it custom
> > > > queueing or CAR or CBWFQ?.Does it require to specify all 4 ports for
> > >traffic
> > > > or not (2065, 1981,1982,1983)
> > > > Thanks in advance
> > > > Jan
> > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:36:20 GMT-3