From: tria_ka@gmx.net
Date: Mon Mar 31 2003 - 02:16:40 GMT-3
frank,
i'm really confused about this.
why did u multiplicate the bytecount with 8 ?
I thought u shoud be devide the bytecount with the total bytecount ??
thanks for clarification
udo
> So if we were to use the 'bandwidth' statement without percent, the answer
> should look like this:
>
> class-map TELNET
> match protocol TELNET
> class-map DNS
> match protocol DNS
> class-map FTP
> match protocol FTP
> class-map DLSW
> match protocol DLSW
>
> Policy-map CBWFQ
> class TELNET
> bandwidth 8
> queue-limit 100
> class DNS
> queue-limit 100
> class FTP
> bandwidth 24
> class DLSW
> bandwidth 40
> class class-default
> bandwidth 8
>
> This is based on converting the bytes to bits and then dividing by 1000
> for
> kbps.
>
> Telnet = 1000 bytes
> (1000*8/1000 = 8)
> DLSW = 5000 bytes
> (5000*8/1000 = 40)
>
> ...and so on. Do you agree with this configuration?
>
> -FM
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tria_ka@gmx.net [mailto:tria_ka@gmx.net]
> Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 3:24 AM
> To: Brian Dennis
> Cc: ciscolab@vip.sina.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Re: RE: QOS
>
>
> Yes there is.
> bandwith without percent means kb/s
> and
> bandwidth percent ....
>
> udo
>
> > Is there any different between "bandwidth" and " bandwidth percent", I
> > am confuse it,
> >
> >
> >
> > ======= 2003-03-30 07:57:00 DzTZ@4PEVPP45@#:=======
> >
> > >maybe there is a mistake .
> > >
> > >so what about the class DNS ?
> > >my solution is:
> > >
> > >1500(defaultvalue) / 11500 *128 = 16.7 * 0.75 = 2.5
> > >
> > >==> is this the value that i nee for
> > >class DNS
> > > bandwidth 12.5 and not 16 !!???
> > > queue-limit 100
> > >
> > >
> > >th anks to all
> > >
> > >udo
> > >
> > >
> > >> ======= 2003-03-27 13:21:00 DzTZ@4PEVPP45@#:=======
> > >>
> > >> >Hi Scott,
> > >> >
> > >> >If I may, I wouldn't allocate 100 of the bandwidth to the classes
> > and
> > >> >would keep the default to 75 . If you want to assign more than 75 to
> > >> >the classes, that's fine but not up to 100.
> > >> >
> > >> >In other words, I'd rather use this formula for queue #1:
> > >> >128 kbps * (1000/11500) * 0.75 = 8 (bandwidth 8)
> > >> >In percentage, this gives us:
> > >> >(1000/11500) * 0.75 = 6.5 (bandwidth percent 6)
> > >> >
> > >> >May be I am missing something here so any input?
> > >> >
> > >> >Fabrice
> > >> >http://www.6colabs.com
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >-----Original Message-----
> > >> >From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > Of
> > >> >Scott M. Livingston
> > >> >Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 8:01 PM
> > >> >To: 'Abdul Waheed Ghaffar'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > >> >Subject: RE: QOS
> > >> >
> > >> >Here is my attempt. For these scenarios if I can spot the bandwidth
> > >> >percent real quick then I just use the 'bandwidth percent' command.
> > In
> > >> >my own freakish way of thinking I can convert it quicker using the
> > >> >formula below. Tell me what you all think and please let me know if
> > I
> > >> >messed up somewhere.
> > >> >
> > >> >BW of Link in kbps * (byte count / total byte count) = BW
> > >> >
> > >> >For example:
> > >> >
> > >> >Queue #1
> > >> >---------
> > >> >128 kbps * (1000 / 11500) = 11
> > >> >
> > >> >!
> > >> >class-map match-all TELNET
> > >> > match protocol telnet
> > >> >class-map match-all DLSW
> > >> > match protocol dlsw
> > >> >class-map match-all FTP
> > >> > match protocol ftp
> > >> >class-map match-all DNS
> > >> > match protocol dns
> > >> >!
> > >> >policy-map MORE-FUN
> > >> > class TELNET
> > >> > bandwidth 11
> > >> > queue-limit 100
> > >> > class DNS
> > >> > bandwidth 16
> > >> > queue-limit 100
> > >> > class FTP
> > >> > bandwidth 33
> > >> > queue-limit 20
> > >> > class DLSW
> > >> > bandwidth 55
> > >> > queue-limit 20
> > >> > class class-default
> > >> > bandwidth 11
> > >> > queue-limit 20
> > >> >!
> > >> >
> > >> >thank you,
> > >> >scott
> > >> >
> > >> >-----Original Message-----
> > >> >From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> > Of
> > >> >Abdul Waheed Ghaffar
> > >> >Sent: Monday, March 24, 2003 7:04 AM
> > >> >To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > >> >Subject: QOS
> > >> >
> > >> >Hi group,
> > >> >
> > >> >I need to convert following CQ into CBWFQ
> > >> ># queue-list 1 protocol tcp 1 telnet byte-count 1000 limit 100
> > >> ># queue-list 1 protocol udp 2 domain limit 100
> > >> ># queue-list 1 protocol tcp 3 ftp byte-count 3000
> > >> ># queue-list 1 protocol dlsw 4 byte-count 5000
> > >> ># queue-list 1 default 16 byte-count 1000
> > >> ># interface serial 0/1
> > >> ># custom-queue-list 1
> > >> >
> > >> >can any body giude me...the serial interface is frame-relay
> > encapsulated
> > >> >
> > >> >....will i map the service on physical interface or under class-map
> > >> >frame-relay?
> > >> >
> > >> >thanks in advance
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >_________________________________________________________________
> > >> >The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
> > >> >http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
> > >>
> > >> = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!VB
> > >> @q#!
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Ciscolab
> > >> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ciscolab@vip.sina.com
> > >> !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!2003-03-30
> > >>
> > >
> > >--
> > >+++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++
> > >Bitte ldcheln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!
> >
> > = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
> >
> >
> > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!VB
> > @q#!
> >
> >
> > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Ciscolab
> > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!ciscolab@vip.sina.com
> > !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!2003-03-30
> >
>
> --
> +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++
> Bitte ldcheln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!
>
-- +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++ Bitte ldcheln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Apr 05 2003 - 08:51:47 GMT-3