From: MMoniz (ccie2002@tampabay.rr.com)
Date: Sun May 09 2004 - 21:18:07 GMT-3
Kenneth, the only reason I can think of is that a lot of carriers never enforce CIR!!
For instance, I have had circuits that were TI access but suppose to be like 256 CIR. By shaping to
the max T1 you still have some control of throttling if congestion occurs.
And at many times the traffic rate was well above the CIR but didn't get throttled because we were shaping to
much higher. It was only degraded when the carrier was oversubscribed or degraded.
Does that make sense? Kind of hard to explain
mike
BTW...QOS is one of my weakest subjects as is with lot's of other people.
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Kenneth Wygand
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 7:58 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Shaping to Peak?
Hey everyone,
I'm really trying to understand all the options for QoS and I'm currently looking at CB Shaping. Why would one want to shape to a _peak_ instead of shaping to an _average_? I understand that shaping to a _peak_ will try to send Bc + Be bits during every Tc, but doesn't that defeat the whole purpose of shaping? Why not just shape to an _average_ but just make the Bc the total combined value of the Bc and Be values used when shaping to a _peak_, and not configure a Be?
Am I missing something?
TIA,
Ken
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jun 02 2004 - 11:12:08 GMT-3