From: Joe Chang (changjoe@earthlink.net)
Date: Mon Jun 14 2004 - 21:55:35 GMT-3
I'll have to correct myself: CBWFQ is a congestion management method - a
means to make sure traffic flows get a fair or desired share of available
bandwidth during congestion. It doesn't actually "resolve" congestion.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joe Chang" <changjoe@earthlink.net>
To: <samccie2004@yahoo.co.uk>; "studygroup" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 8:25 PM
Subject: Re: Bandwidth Vs MinCIR for CBWFQ
> Those are two different things you're working with. FR shaping is a
> preventative measure against congestion within the FR switch network.
CBWFQ
> is a method to resolve congestion when it actually occurs on a router's
> egress interface. Does your question ask for a bandwidth guarantee from
> end-to-end across two points? Or does it ask for a guarantee for a
specific
> flow in the midst of congestion?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <samccie2004@yahoo.co.uk>
> To: "studygroup" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Monday, June 14, 2004 1:29 PM
> Subject: Bandwidth Vs MinCIR for CBWFQ
>
>
> > Hi Group
> >
> > When asked to guarantee BW foe QOS using CBWFQ on interfaces
encapsulated
> > with frame-relay. What is the correct way to do so.
> >
> > Do I apply Bandwidth statement as I would for a HDLC interafce or even
> > ethernet, or do I rely on shapping DLCI with a MIncir equal the BW
> required.
> >
> > TIA
> >
> > Sam
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 03 2004 - 19:40:40 GMT-3