From: CNLink Technical (tech_support@us.cnlink.net)
Date: Mon Jun 02 2003 - 16:48:33 GMT-3
Then for a conversion, it would seem that it would be logical to make the
CBWFQ use 100% also. And it is easier to use percents in the CBWFQ
(specifying min. guar. bandwidth during times of congestion)
Why do people keep talking about this anyways? I don't see any problems
like this in my practice labs and it seems too ambiguous anyways.
JC Cham
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
FATHALLAH
Sent: Monday, June 02, 2003 9:32 AM
To: neil K.; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Custom Q to CBWFQ
Because CQ use 100% of bandwidth.
Said FATHALLAH.
--Message d'origine-----
De : nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]De la part de
neil K.
Envoyi : vendredi 30 mai 2003 16:07
@ : ccielab@groupstudy.com
Objet : Custom Q to CBWFQ
Hi guys,
So far I have come to this for converting CQ to CBWFQ
Given Custom Queue with,
telnet byte-count 100
dns byte-count 300
www byte-count 200
default byte-count 400
As part of conversion
Total sum=1000
therefor Telnet= 100/1000=.1 = 10 %
dns= 300/1000=30 %
www= 20 %
Default=40 %
Total percentage = 10+30+20+40= 1000
now configure like this
class-map TEL
match protocol telnet
class-map dns
match protocol dns
class-map www
match protocol http
Policy-map P1
class TEL
bandwidth percent 10
class DNS
bandwidth percent 30
class www
bandwidth percent 20
class class-default
bandwidth percent 40
Int serial 0
max-reserved-bandwidth 100
service-policy P1 output
bandwidth 128
This seems to be correct if we use max-reserved-bandwidth 100 but then why
can't we use 128k and multiply with.75 (default for CBWFQ) and get
bandwidth.
Help me fix this.
jason
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jul 04 2003 - 11:10:51 GMT-3