Re: QoS last frontier

From: Ted Richmond (rich_ted@xxxxxxxxx)
Date: Sat Aug 17 2002 - 04:40:12 GMT-3


   
Thankyou very much.
This clears my qos doubts.

-Ted

--- ccie candidate <ccie1@lycos.com> wrote:
> hi
> i can try to answer some of your questions based on
> my understanding
>
> 1) ip rtp priority is actually part of the WFQ ,
> where you add to the fair queue a strict queue to
> prioritize the voice traffic .
> i believe you can use the command on the frame relay
> interface , however the frame-relay rtp priority can
> be used per PVC [ assume you have multiple PVCs and
> you want to use fair queuing on one of them and
> another thing like PQ on another PVC ].
>
> 2) i think you can use either techniques
> 3) dunno
> 4)no , i think and "distributed " thing is for the
> VIP cards of the 7000 series which is not part of
> the equipment list
>
> 5) definitely no , FRTS can be used for PVC , the
> note is talking about the frame relay switch where
> you use the route command .
>
>
> if you want to correct me if im wrong ..you most
> welcome
>
>
> HTH
>
> --
>
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2002 01:03:07
> Ted Richmond wrote:
> >Hi group,
> >
> >Just now, I finished reading Qos config guide. It
> is a
> >good doc, but it still didt'n answer all the
> issues.
> >Here are some of the issues that are not clearly
> >addressed in the cnfig guide:
> >
> >1) Can we apply 'ip rtp priority' on a frame-relay
> >interface? If yes, what is preferred on a frameR
> intf?
> >- ip rtp priority or frame-relay ip rtp priority?
> >
> >2) If we are requiredl to allocate 50% b/w to a
> >traffic during congestion, what method should we
> >follow - CBWFQ/ custom-queuing?
> >
> >3) Do we have to worry about random-detect dspu....
> >for the CCIE lab exam?
> >
> >4) Is DTS (distributed traffic shaping) part of the
> >test?
> >
> >5) Is FRTS only for frame-relay SVCs? There is a
> note
> >in Qc-157- "FRTS is not effective for Layer 2 PVC
> >switching using the frame-relay route command"
> >
> >Thanks in advance.
> >
> >
> >



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:27 GMT-3