From: Timothy Snow (timsnow@cogeco.ca)
Date: Sat Jul 19 2003 - 02:01:09 GMT-3
I have a question regarding the order of class-maps? Does it make a
difference in a service policy. My task was to give IP traffic a
bandwith of 40% of the link while telnet gets 10%. I know that it won't
really kick in until there is contention for the link but the "show
policy-map int s 0" shows that traffic is hitting the IP class but not
the telnet class even though I have telnet sessions active.
Could anyone elaborate on if there is a structured order?
interface Serial0
ip address 150.20.0.5 255.255.255.224
encapsulation frame-relay
service-policy output foo
no arp frame-relay
frame-relay map ip 150.20.0.2 504
frame-relay map ip 150.20.0.4 504 broadcast
frame-relay map ip 150.20.0.6 504
no frame-relay inverse-arp
frame-relay lmi-type cisco
policy-map foo
class ip
bandwidth percent 40
class telnet
bandwidth percent 10
class class-default
fair-queue
access-list 100 permit ip any any
access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq telnet log
r5>sh policy-map int s 0
Serial0
Service-policy output: foo
Class-map: ip (match-all)
504 packets, 210843 bytes
5 minute offered rate 16000 bps, drop rate 0 bps
Match: access-group 100
Weighted Fair Queueing
Output Queue: Conversation 265
Bandwidth 40 (%) Max Threshold 64 (packets)
(pkts matched/bytes matched) 427/204125
(depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
Class-map: telnet (match-all)
0 packets, 0 bytes
5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
Match: access-group 101
Weighted Fair Queueing
Output Queue: Conversation 266
Bandwidth 10 (%) Max Threshold 64 (packets)
(pkts matched/bytes matched) 0/0
(depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
Class-map: class-default (match-any)
35 packets, 455 bytes
5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
Match: any
Weighted Fair Queueing
Flow Based Fair Queueing
Maximum Number of Hashed Queues 256
(total queued/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Aug 06 2003 - 06:52:45 GMT-3