From: Peng Zheng (zpnist@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Jun 26 2004 - 22:29:55 GMT-3
When we set shape peak with be 0, we get the same
result as shape average. Then I think shape peak can
do everything shape average can do. Why do we need
shape average?
--- Scott Morris <swm@emanon.com> wrote:
> Shape average will target the Bc value as the "goal"
> Shape peak will target the Bc + Be value as the
> "goal"
>
> So you are right in the shift of your target goals
> based on each type of
> shaping. I had a nice CCO document on this once,
> but I couldn't find it
> right away here. I'll keep looking and post later
> if I find it again! :)
>
>
> Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service
> Provider) #4713, CISSP,
> JNCIP, et al.
> IPExpert CCIE Program Manager
> IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
> swm@emanon.com/smorris@ipexpert.net
> http://www.ipexpert.net
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com
> [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Peng
> Zheng
> Sent: Saturday, June 26, 2004 6:48 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: shape peak ans shape average
>
> Hi,
>
> I can not figure out the differences between them.
>
> It is said:
>
> For example:
>
>
> shape average 512000
> shape peak 512000
>
> According my understanding, both 512000 is CIR.
> Then for shape peak, the
> rate could be:
>
> (bc+be)/bc *cir
>
> Default bc=be, then for shape peak, the rate could
> be:
>
> (bc+be)/bc * 512000=1024000
>
>
> Is it right?
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Get it on your mobile
> phone.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/maildemo
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jul 03 2004 - 19:40:51 GMT-3