From: cannonr (cannonr@attbi.com)
Date: Sat Feb 01 2003 - 12:49:23 GMT-3
Umair,
If they wanted you to use CBWFQ for you first question, they would have
worded the question more like this.....
"During times of congestion, IP traffic gets 60% of available bandwidth on a
link, DLSw gets 20%, etc."
For the second question, it is obvious that they wan't you to limit the
bandwidth that PING uses to 5% and drop anything above the limit - probably
to prevent DOS attacks. PQ, CQ, and CBWFQ would not accomplish this.
Royce
----- Original Message -----
From: "Umair Hoodbhoy" <umair@cisco.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Sunday, January 26, 2003 10:11 AM
Subject: How to approach QoS questions in the lab
> Hi all,
>
> I have a question about what the approach should be when tackling QoS
> questions in the lab. I was doing a few questions from a practice lab
> and they tend to ask for the Big Picture. But I don't think that they
> can be implemented in more than one way. Which brings me to my question:
> How can you identify what they are asking for?
>
> For example, in the practice lab, one question asked to guarantee that
> IP traffic gets 60% of the available bandwidth on a link, DLSw gets 20%,
> and all other traffic gets the remaining 20%. I thought it could be done
> by CBWFQ using the classmap-policymap-servicepolicy combination. However
> the solution configs used custom queuing. Could it have been done using
> CBWFQ and how would you recognize that?
>
> Another question asked to limit a single router (no mention of which
> interfaces) to allow up to 5% of its bandwidth for Ping traffic. Here
> the solutions used CAR and the rate-limit command in conjunction with an
> access-list. But what would the thought process be into coming to that
> conclusion?
>
> Thanks in advance for your help,
>
> -- Umair
> .
.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Mar 01 2003 - 11:06:00 GMT-3