From: MMoniz (ccie2002@tampabay.rr.com)
Date: Wed Aug 20 2003 - 17:39:44 GMT-3
Jim,
To me this sounds more like a WCCP solution. Since the link isn't congested
QOS will not really come into play, except of course for like bandwidth
amounts and such.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Larry Roberts
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 3:01 PM
To: James Stewart; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: QoS on Router or Switch
James,
QoS is much easier to implement on a router as opposed to a switch. I would
also look at rate-limiting the FTP traffic so that it can only use up a
certain percentage of the bandwidth. Rate-limiting can be done either
inbound or outbound on the router, shaping can only be done outbound.
HTH,
Larry Roberts
CCIE #7886 (R&S / Security)
----- Original Message -----
From: "James Stewart" <j_t_s_stewart@hotmail.com>
To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2003 11:52 AM
Subject: QoS on Router or Switch
> Hi
>
> Not sure where to apply the QoS.
>
> Users on a LAN on R1 complain that www access is slow.
> R1 is connected to the internet via a FR link to R2, which is not
congested.
> Users on the LAN are also backing up several servers using FTP over the
> same link.
>
> Should the QoS giving priority to www over ftp be implemented on the 3550
> switch egress port, ingress port of R1 or the egress of R1?
>
> Any ideas?
>
> Thanks Jim
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Sign-up for a FREE BT Broadband connection today!
> http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/btbroadband
>
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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 : Tue Sep 02 2003 - 18:54:04 GMT-3