From: samccie2004@yahoo.co.uk
Date: Tue Jun 15 2004 - 12:04:53 GMT-3
Thanks for ur replies, I shall go and find out more and then comeback and
haunt again with a concrete example for IElabs.
Cheers
Sam
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com]On Behalf Of
Richard Dumoulin
Sent: 15 June 2004 10:50
To: samccie2004@yahoo.co.uk; studygroup
Subject: RE: Bandwidth Vs MinCIR for CBWFQ
Sam, you have to apply the "bandwidth" command. "Guarantee" means that in
times of congestion you should be giving a minimum of bandwidth to the
traffic. Note that with the "priority" command, you are giving a prioritised
maximum bandwidth when there is congestion.
Shaping does not provide this minimum bandwidth. This mechanism's objective
is to enforce an average rate when traffic reaches a certain rate level,
--Richard
-----Original Message-----
From: samccie2004@yahoo.co.uk [mailto:samccie2004@yahoo.co.uk]
Sent: lunes, 14 de junio de 2004 20:29
To: studygroup
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
**********************************************************************
Any opinions expressed in the email are those of the individual and not
necessarily the company. This email and any files transmitted with it are
confidential and solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you are
not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering it to
the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this email in
error and that any dissemination, distribution, copying or use is strictly
prohibited.
If you have received this email in error, or if you are concerned with the
content of this email please e-mail to: e-security.support@vanco.co.uk
The contents of an attachment to this e-mail may contain software viruses
which could damage your own computer system. While the sender has taken
every reasonable precaution to minimise this risk, we cannot accept
liability for any damage which you sustain as a result of software viruses.
You should carry out your own virus checks before opening any attachments to
this e-mail.
**********************************************************************
is e-mail.
**********************************************************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 03 2004 - 19:40:41 GMT-3