From: John Matijevic (matijevi@bellsouth.net)
Date: Sat Jun 28 2003 - 17:15:47 GMT-3
Hello All,
This is pretty much the same config Mohit, had I have just added the
access-lists and more words for clarity.
please correct me if im wrong.
class-map match-all telnet-ftp-traffic
match access-group 101
match access-group 102
class-map match-all ipx-icmp-traffic
match protocol ipx
match access-group 103
class-map match-all interface-bytes-traffic
match interface ethernet 0
match access-group 104
policy-map sl
class telnet-ftp-traffic
bandwidth percent 50
class ipx-icmp-traffic
bandwidth percent 25
class interface-bytes-traffic
bandwidth percent 15
class class-default
bandwidth percent 10
int s1
max-reserved-bandwidth 100
service-policy output sl
access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq 23
access-list 102 permit tcp any any eq 21
access-list 103 permit icmp any any
access-list 104 permit ???
The only part I could not figure out is how to let the access-list permit ip
traffic greater than 1200 bytes, if anyone knows the answer to this please
respond.
But I believe this covers the majority of the config, again Im using the
notion that you simply add up the percents to get the
max-reserved-bandwidth, im not sure if that is the way or previous way I
described.
Sincerely,
Matijevic
----- Original Message -----
From: "SHARMA,MOHIT (HP-Germany,ex1)" <mohit.sharma@hp.com>
To: "'Brian McGahan'" <brian@cyscoexpert.com>; "'John Matijevic'"
<matijevi@bellsouth.net>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 2:19 PM
Subject: RE: QOS and custom queueing(to CBWFQ)
> Hi Brian,John,
>
> Thanx a lot really for the explanatiion.
>
> I deduct from this, that my solution for turning John's custom queue to
> CBWFQ is wrong, as it will just allocate the b/w caclulating on the
> ''relative bandwitdh".
> Would it then be safe to say, that in cases like this we should use the
> bandwdth command and not the bandwidth percent?
>
> Just recieved John's mail also, and it seems that both the views are quite
> conflicting, should we use the byte-count or the percentage? I guess
> byte-count would be a safer bet. But then how can we get the bandwidth
> amount to be allocated for each queue, in CBWFQ classes?
> I know I m asking too much, but would it be possible for you, to take
> John's custom queue as an example and illustrate how we can do the
> conversion, I guess a lot of people would be curious by now and all of us
> would be really grateful :-)
>
> Thanks as always,
>
> Smiles,
>
> Mohit
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian McGahan [mailto:brian@cyscoexpert.com]
> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 7:34 PM
> To: 'SHARMA,MOHIT (HP-Germany,ex1)'; 'John Matijevic';
> ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: QOS and custom queueing(to CBWFQ)
>
>
> Mohit,
>
> The 'bandwidth percent' command does a relative bandwidth
> reservation based on the current available bandwidth of that interface.
> Available bandwidth is calculated as follows:
>
> Available_Bandwidth = (Configured_Bandwidth *
> max-reserved-bandwidth/100) - (LLQ - RTP - RSVP)
>
> First take the 'bandwidth' statement configured on the interface
> and multiply by the percentage that is reservable. By default,
> max-reserved-bandwidth is 75. Then, subtract any bandwidth reserved by
> priority queues, including the low latency queue (LLQ), real time
> protocol (RTP), or resource reservation protocol (RSVP). The available
> bandwidth value can be seen when you 'show queue [interface]':
>
> R1#sh queue fa0/0 | in Available
> Available Bandwidth 75000 kilobits/sec
>
> Here we see a FastEthernet interface with no prior reservations.
> By default, max-reserved-bandwidth is 75, therefore we have an available
> bandwidth of 75Mbps.
>
> Now suppose we configure the following:
>
> class-map match-all FTP
> match protocol ftp
> !
> policy-map QOS
> class FTP
> bandwidth percent 50
> !
> interface FastEthernet0/0
> service-policy output QOS
> !
>
> R1#sh queue fa0/0 | in Available
> Available Bandwidth 75000 kilobits/sec
>
> We are reserving 50% of the bandwidth on this interface for FTP.
> Since the available bandwidth on the interface is 75Mbps, and we are
> doing a percentage reservation, FTP is effectively guaranteed a minimum
> of 37.5Mbps (50% of 75% of 100Mbps).
>
> If we actually want to reserve 50Mbps for FTP, we have three
> options:
>
> 1. Set 'max-reserved-bandwidth' to 100
>
> interface FastEthernet0/0
> max-reserved-bandwidth 100
> service-policy output QOS
>
> R1#sh queue fa0/0 | in Available
> Available Bandwidth 100000 kilobits/sec
>
> Since 100Mbps is now available on this interface, FTP is
> guaranteed 50Mbps (50% of 100Mbps).
>
> 2. Do an absolute 'bandwidth [kbps]' reservation
>
> class-map match-all FTP
> match protocol ftp
> !
> policy-map QOS
> class FTP
> bandwidth 50000
> !
> interface FastEthernet0/0
> service-policy output QOS
>
> R1#sh queue fa0/0 | in Available
> Available Bandwidth 25000 kilobits/sec
>
> 'bandwidth [kbps]' is an absolute reservation, and is not based
> on the available bandwidth of the interface. You can see that after
> configuring 'bandwidth 50000' under the FTP class, only 25Mbps is now
> available on the interface.
>
> 3. Change the configured 'bandwidth' value on the interface
>
> While not very practical, we can adjust the bandwidth value on
> the interface so that the following would be true:
>
> Interface_bandwidth = configured_bandwidth * max-reserved-bandwidth/100
>
> Configured_bandwidth = interface_bandwidth * 100/max-reserved-bandwidth
>
> interface FastEthernet0/0
> bandwidth 133334
> service-policy output QOS
>
> R1#sh queue fa0/0 | in Available
> Available Bandwidth 100000 kilobits/sec
>
> While the third option is a roundabout solution, the point of
> the exercise is to show that the available bandwidth is based on the
> configured 'bandwidth' keyword, and not a function of the physical
> interface.
>
>
> HTH
>
> Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
> Director of Design and Implementation
> brian@cyscoexpert.com
>
> CyscoExpert Corporation
> Internetwork Consulting & Training
> Toll Free: 866.CyscoXP
> Fax: 847.674.2625
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of
> > SHARMA,MOHIT (HP-Germany,ex1)
> > Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 11:49 AM
> > To: 'John Matijevic'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: RE: QOS and custom queueing(to CBWFQ)
> >
> > Hi John,
> >
> > Thanx for the same.
> >
> > Another one now. If you need to convert this queue into CBWFQ ( I saw
> a
> > post
> > from yesterday, but it was not "really"followed up", but got me
> thinking),
> > would you put the percentage in the policy map, as 50,25, 15 and 10,
> will
> > this allocate 75 percent of the interface bandwith?
> > I tried to implement it, but the available bandwith it shows is
> 7500kb, on
> > a
> > 10 mb interface. Quite confusing.-
> > here's the config-
> >
> > class-map match-any kl
> > match protocol telnet
> > match protocol ftp
> > class-map match-any hl
> > match access-group 900
> > match access-group 110
> > class-map match-any gl
> > match input-interface Ethernet0/0
> > match access-group 198
> >
> > policy-map look
> > class kl
> > bandwidth percent 40
> > class hl
> > bandwidth percent 25
> > class gl
> > bandwidth percent 15
> > class class-default
> > bandwidth percent 10
> >
> > interface Ethernet0/1
> > ip address 10.15.1.3 255.255.255.0
> > half-duplex
> > service-policy output look
> > end
> >
> > oob-main-site#sh queueing interface e0/1
> > Interface Ethernet0/1 queueing strategy: fair
> > Input queue: 0/75/0/0 (size/max/drops/flushes); Total output drops:
> 0
> > Queueing strategy: weighted fair
> > Output queue: 0/1000/64/0 (size/max total/threshold/drops)
> > Conversations 0/1/256 (active/max active/max total)
> > Reserved Conversations 4/4 (allocated/max allocated)
> > Available Bandwidth 7500 kilobits/sec
> > <--------------------------------------
> >
> > Couls somebody please advice.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Mohit.
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Matijevic [mailto:matijevi@bellsouth.net]
> > Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 6:16 PM
> > To: SHARMA,MOHIT (HP-Germany,ex1); ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Re: QOS and custom queueing
> >
> >
> > OK, Here we go:
> > In the example the workbook is using 10000 bytes, with 12.1 ios
> version
> > you
> > dont have to be specific in the byte count because it will borrow from
> the
> > next queue to be serviced. So if you use 1000 bytes as a reference,
> 50%
> > would be 5000 bytes for queue1, 25% would be 2500 bytes for queue2,
> 15% is
> > 1500 for queue 3, you dont have to specify becuase the default bytes
> for a
> > queue is 1500 bytes, Since the calculation comes out to the same as
> the
> > defualt you do not need to specify.
> > Sincerely,
> > Matijevic
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "SHARMA,MOHIT (HP-Germany,ex1)" <mohit.sharma@hp.com>
> > To: "'John Matijevic'" <matijevi@bellsouth.net>;
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2003 11:47 AM
> > Subject: RE: QOS and custom queueing
> >
> >
> > > Hi John,
> > >
> > > Could you please xplain, why is the byte count for specifically
> queue 3
> > is
> > > missing and why 10K?
> > >
> > > Yu kind of got me confused with your example :-)
> > >
> > > Thanx,
> > >
> > > Mohit.
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: John Matijevic [mailto:matijevi@bellsouth.net]
> > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:22 PM
> > > To: John Matijevic; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > > Subject: Re: QOS and custom queueing
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks all,
> > > I got the answer it looks like it is based off of 10000 bytes and
> with
> > IOS
> > > 12.1 you do not need to be specific and can user whatever number you
> > want
> > if
> > > its not given.
> > > Sincerely,
> > > Matijevic
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "John Matijevic" <matijevi@bellsouth.net>
> > > To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 3:11 PM
> > > Subject: QOS and custom queueing
> > >
> > >
> > > > Hello Team,
> > > > I have the following scenerio:
> > > > queue-list 1 protocol ip 1 tcp telnet
> > > > queue-list 1 protocol ip 1 tcp ftp
> > > > queue-list 1 protocol ipx 2
> > > > queue-list 1 protocol ip 2 list 101
> > > > queue-list 1 protocol ip 3 gt 1200
> > > > queue-list 1 interface Ethernet0 3
> > > > queue-list 1 default 4
> > > >
> > > > Basically I have 4 queues and the question asks to configure
> Custom
> > > Queueing
> > > > so that 50% of bandwidth go to que 1, 25% goes to que 2, 15% goest
> to
> > que
> > > 3,
> > > > and 10% goes to que 4.
> > > > The answer is the following:
> > > > queue-list 1 queue 1 byte-count 5000
> > > > queue-list 1 queue 2 byte-count 2500
> > > > queue-list 1 queue 4 byte-count 1000
> > > > My question is how the numbers get derived in the answer? I am
> > thinking
> > > that
> > > > they are using 10000 kilobytes as a reference, i think it may be
> > because
> > > since
> > > > ethernet 0 is in one of the queues that its bandwidth is 10000kb,
> but
> > I
> > am
> > > not
> > > > a 100% sure, I think that the default you use is 1500 bytes, and
> since
> > > there
> > > > are 4 queues I thought it would be 6000, since they dont say the
> byte
> > > count of
> > > > each queue. how do you come up with this? Also I think there
> should
> > be
> > > > another que in the answer, queue-list 1 queue 3 byte-count 1500,
> Could
> > > someone
> > > > help me clarify?
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > Matijevic
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > > > You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion
> Group.
> > > >
> > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > >
> > >
> > >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > > You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
> > >
> > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________________________________
> > You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
> >
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> You are subscribed to the GroupStudy.com CCIE R&S Discussion Group.
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jul 04 2003 - 11:11:14 GMT-3