From: Kenneth Wygand (KWygand@customonline.com)
Date: Wed Apr 21 2004 - 22:32:11 GMT-3
Chris,
I would think your configuration is exactly right. This configuration
seems to support all technical references I've seen.
Kenneth E. Wygand
Systems Engineer, Project Services
CISSP #37102, CCNP, CCDP, ACSP, Cisco IPT Design Specialist, MCP, CNA,
Network+, A+
Custom Computer Specialists, Inc.
"The only unattainable goal is the one not attempted."
-Anonymous
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Lord, Chris
Sent: Wednesday, April 21, 2004 8:42 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: QoS Question
Hi Group,
Please can anyone assist with the following scenario......
There is a 2Mbit/sec interface on which the following outbound service
policy needs to be defined:
class VOICE - 500Mb LLQ
class SITEX - must not transmit more than 128kb even when there is no
congestion on the interface. When the interface becomes congested 128kb
of bandwidth must be available to this class if it needs it. When this
class does not need 128kb of bandwidth the surplus should be made
available to other classes.
class class-default - remainder of bandwidth.
To achieve the SITEX specification is it permissible and/or appropriate
to use both the "police" and "bandwidth" commands together?
policy-map SERVICE
class VOICE
priority 500
class SITEX
police 128000 conform transmit exceed drop
bandwidth 128
class class-default
fair-queue
random-detect
Thanks in anticipation,
Chris.
**********************************************************************
The information contained in this email is confidential and is intended
for the recipient only. If you have received it in error, please notify
us immediately by reply email and then delete it from your system.
Please do not copy it or use it for any purposes, or disclose its
contents to any other person or store or copy this information in any
medium. The views contained in this email are those of the author and
not necessarily those of Lorien plc.
Thank you for your co-operation.
**********************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon May 03 2004 - 19:48:52 GMT-3