From: Omer Ansari (omer@xxxxxxxxxx)
Date: Wed Aug 28 2002 - 06:56:22 GMT-3
Guys,
so bottom line is Jim and Steve have correctly done this right?
It seems good to me, and I too want to stick this once and for all.
omer
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002 steven.j.nelson@bt.com wrote:
> All
>
> Jim is correct in this one, his figures pan out as follows
>
> CIR 96000
> MINCIR 64000
> BE 32000
> BC 8000
> TC 0.125Ms
>
> So in 8 time slots (1 Second) he will transmit :-
>
> 0.125Ms 40000 (BC+BE)
> 0.125Ms 8000 (BC)
> 0.125Ms 8000 (BC)
> 0.125Ms 8000 (BC)
> 0.125Ms 8000 (BC)
> 0.125Ms 8000 (BC)
> 0.125Ms 8000 (BC)
> 0.125Ms 8000 (BC)
>
> Which is equivalent to 96K per second.
>
> And when no tokens are available then the MIN CIR will be met by the 8000 BC
> * 8 = 64000
>
> Thanks to Jim for this one.
>
> Steve
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Brown [mailto:Jim.Brown@caselogic.com]
> Sent: 26 August 2002 15:24
> To: 'kpalmer'
> Cc: 'ccielab@groupstudy.com'
> Subject: RE: I need FRTS help or review
>
>
> After your e-mails I rethought my stance on FRTS. I did a little more
> research and I believe my original configuration at the bottom of the post
> is the correct answer from a lab or testing context for a 96Kbps port and
> 64Kbs contracted CIR.
>
> map-class frame-relay TestShape
> frame-relay cir 64000
> frame-relay be 32000
> frame-relay bc 8000
>
> I'm basing this on a single new piece of information I turned-up. Check the
> Networkers 2002 CCIE Power Session, in their FRTS example, they configure
> the parameters exactly as I have described below.
>
> I still stand by my original assessment of Cisco's CIR set to the providers
> CIR and Cisco's BE set to the difference between providers CIR and port
> speed.
>
> I'm posting this back to the list to hopefully open up discussion again.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: kpalmer [mailto:kip.palmer@verizon.net]
> Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 8:27 PM
> To: 'Jim Brown'
> Subject: RE: I need FRTS help or review
>
>
> Line speed | Access Rate | Port Speed
> =======================================
> What you bought from the Provider. Per DLCI.
>
>
> Average Rate | configured CIR (not mincir)
> =======================================
> When Shaping 128 to 64, it's 64k, with Bc ='s the Average Rate of remote
> 64, /8.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> Jim Brown
> Sent: Sunday, August 25, 2002 1:04 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: I need FRTS help or review
>
>
> Everything I have read about FRTS doesn't seem to clear up the use of
> BE, BC, CIR, and MINCIR. I have been unable to locate a solid resource
> explaining the concept with any finality.
>
> I've read most of the relevant Usenet postings on Deja, watched the
> threads on groupstudy, scoured CCO, and examined the QOS v1.0 course
> material.
>
> I will throw out my assumptions and let list members either verify or
> shoot holes on my take of FRTS.
>
>
> A few definitions up front:
>
> AR is the Access Rate or Port Speed of the connection to the frame relay
> cloud. This is the maximum number of bits that can be transmitted to the
> cloud.
>
> CIR is the Committed Information Rate. This is the maximum number of
> bits the provider promises to transmit. Anything above the CIR and below
> the access rate will have the DE bit marked and is eligible for
> discard/drop during times of congestion.
>
> Lets take a hypothetical circuit for instance, a port speed of 96Kbps
> and a CIR of 64Kbps.
>
> The way I read the documentation, in a Cisco configuration CIR should be
> set to the actual provider CIR or 64000. The BE or burst excess should
> be set to the difference between the access rate and the CIR. I think BE
> should be set to 32000, the difference between 96 and 64.
>
> Here is a brief sample config:
>
> map-class frame-relay TestShape
> frame-relay cir 64000
> frame-relay be 32000
>
>
> The map-class could then be applied to the frame map or the interface. I
> was previously under the impression you would set the Cisco CIR to the
> port speed and the minCIR to the provider contracted CIR. I don't think
> this is really the case?
>
> Here is an example:
>
> map-class frame-relay TestShape
> frame-relay cir 96000
> frame-relay mincir 64000
>
> Comments or suggestions? Is this wrong, why or why not?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Sep 07 2002 - 19:48:40 GMT-3