RE: Which one should I pick ?

From: Ozgur Guler (Garanti Teknoloji) (OzgurG@garanti.com.tr)
Date: Wed Oct 08 2003 - 11:59:27 GMT-3

• Next message: Brian McGahan: "RE: Multicast in NBMA"
• Previous message: Ronny Jonathan: "Re: Auto-cost reference-bandwidth problem"
• Maybe in reply to: Hunt Lee: "Which one should I pick ?"
• Next in thread: Mike Williams: "RE: Which one should I pick ?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

if you consider traffic shaping here,
use shape avarage, not shape peak,
this will prevent bursting beyond the given CIR.

Ozgur
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Hunt Lee
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2003 5:06 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Which one should I pick ?

If I have a question:

Configure CBWFQ on R1's Ethernet interface such that it allocates min bandwidth of 3mbps for VLANA. VLANA traffic should limit to 5mbps and cannot utilize more physical bandwidth during non-congestion period.

Should I use:

policy-map cbwfq
 class VLAND
   bandwidth 3000
   shape peak 5000000

OR

policy-map cbwfq
 class VLAND
   bandwidth 3000
   police 5000000 937500 1875000 conform-action transmit exceed-action drop violate-action drop

And if you could give me reasoning on why you pick that one, it would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you so much in advance,
H.

***Get your CCIE and a FREE vacation: Shop.GroupStudy.com***

• Next message: Brian McGahan: "RE: Multicast in NBMA"
• Previous message: Ronny Jonathan: "Re: Auto-cost reference-bandwidth problem"
• Maybe in reply to: Hunt Lee: "Which one should I pick ?"
• Next in thread: Mike Williams: "RE: Which one should I pick ?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Nov 24 2003 - 07:52:59 GMT-3