From: Jonathan V Hays (jhays@jtan.com)
Date: Tue Nov 25 2003 - 14:32:04 GMT-3
I've been wondering about the usefulness of that "continue" option for
some time.
Great example, Brian!!
Jonathan
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Brian McGahan
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 12:14 PM
To: 'Tony Singh (A)'; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: CAR vs Service policy
Tony,
'continue' means continue on to the next rate-limit statement.
This
way you can make a complex policy top down. Take the following:
interface Ethernet0/0
rate-limit output 1000000 31250 31250 conform-action set-prec-transmit
5
exceed-action continue
rate-limit output 2000000 62500 62500 conform-action set-prec-transmit
1
exceed-action continue
rate-limit output 3000000 93750 93750 conform-action set-prec-transmit
0
exceed-action drop
This equates to:
If the rate is <= 1Mbps, set prec 5 and transmit, else continue to next
statement
Next, if the rate is 1Mbps < rate <= 2Mbps, set prec 1 transmit, else
continue
Next, if the rate is 2Mbps < rate <= 3Mbps, set prec 0 transmit, else
drop
HTH,
Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987
Direct: 708-362-1418 (Outside the US and Canada)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tony Singh (A) [mailto:SinghA1@telkom.co.za]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 10:56 AM
> To: Brian McGahan; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: CAR vs Service policy
>
> Hi
>
> The "police" continue by default if the drop option is not specified.
> Is my assumption right??
>
> 2 I also assume that if I don't put continue at the end of the below
> statement the traffic that does not conform will be send anyway
>
> rate-limit output access-group 101 8000 2000 4000 conform-action
> set-prec-transmit 5 exceed-action set-prec-transmit 0(.....)
>
>
> Tony
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian McGahan [mailto:bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 6:32 PM
> To: Tony Singh (A); ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: CAR vs Service policy
>
> Tony,
>
> They are effectively the same. The minor differences are that
> the
> MQC police statement has no direction, because the direction is
> determined
> by how the service policy. Also there is no access-list or qos-group
> list
> option, because this is matched inside the class-map. The main
> differences
> however are in the implementation of the algorithm.
>
> The 'police' statement uses a three rate policer, and supports
> the
> 'violate' action. For this reason the 'police' statement does not
> support a
> 'continue' in its conform, exceed, violate options. This makes it
> more
> difficult to create a complex top down policing policy since you have
> to use
> nested classes.
>
> Regardless the MQC is the preferred method because it is
> modular and
> easily changed and applied to multiple interfaces.
>
> HTH,
>
> Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
> bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
> Toll Free: 877-224-8987
> Direct: 708-362-1418 (Outside the US and Canada)
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of
> > Tony Singh (A)
> > Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 9:19 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: CAR vs Service policy
> >
> > Hi All
> >
> >
> >
> > What is the difference between rate-limiting direct on the interface
> > and using a service policy????/
> >
> >
> >
> > Example 1
> >
> > interface fastethernet 0/0
> >
> > description 45Mbps to R2
> >
> > rate-limit output access-group 101 8000 2000 4000 conform-action
> > set-prec-transmit 5 exceed-action set-prec-transmit 0
> >
> > ip address 10.1.0.9 255.255.255.0
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Example 2
> >
> >
> >
> > class-map match-all acgroup2
> >
> > match access-group 101
> >
> > !
> >
> > !
> >
> > policy-map police
> >
> > class acgroup2
> >
> > police 8000 2000 4000 conform-action set-prec-transmit 5
> > exceed-action set-prec-transmit 0
> >
> > interface fastethernet 0/0
> >
> > service-policy input police
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > interface fastethernet 0/0
> >
> > service-policy output police
> >
> >
> >
> > Tony
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Anesh Singh (A)
> > SinghA1@telkom.co.za
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Powered by Plaxo <http://www.plaxo.com/signature/>
> >
> > Want a signature like this? <http://www.plaxo.com/signature/>
> >
> > [GroupStudy removed an attachment of type image/gif which had a name
> of
> > image001.gif]
> >
> >
> ______________________________________________________________________
> _
> > Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials
> from:
> > http://shop.groupstudy.com
> >
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Dec 12 2003 - 12:29:17 GMT-3