From: Shinji Kanehori (kanehori@nttdocomo.co.jp)
Date: Wed Jul 28 2004 - 12:59:28 GMT-3
My info I have all is only below lurl.
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fqos
_c/fqcprt2/qcfcq.htm#1000908
which is true ?
Is byte-count of default queue 1500 ?
Or
Does Byte-count automatically ajust to remaining 89%?
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
gladston@br.ibm.com
Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 2004 11:19 PM
To: chenry@reuna.cl
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: CQ band reservation
I think so, but I hope someone confirm or disagree.
The default byte count would be calculated to send as many packet as
needed to represent 89%.
Internally the IOS would serve each queue dequeuing the packets entered in
the byte count. It is not related to the maximum bandwidth as it is on
CBWFQ.
Cordialmente,
------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaerte Gladston Vidali
IBM Global Services - SO
Tel.55+11+2121-2879 Fax:55+11+2121-2449
Cristian Henry H <chenry@reuna.cl>
28/07/2004 11:05
Please respond to
chenry
To
Alaerte Gladston Vidali/Brazil/IBM@IBMBR
cc
Subject
Re: CQ band reservation
What about the byte-count of default-queue?, Should it represent the 89%
of interface bandwidth in order to assure the 1% and 10% requested ?,
something like byte-count = 45568 (512 x 89)?
gladston@br.ibm.com ha escrito:
>
> You need to configure "queue-list 1 default x" so other traffic goes to
a specific queue. The default byte-count will be 1500 for the default
queue.
>
> Concerned to if it can use up to 100% of the bandwidth thse are my
though:
> (I hope somebody else comment it)
>
> 1-if you are applying it to a physical inteface, maximum-reservation
will let you use up to 75% of the interface bandwidth
>
> 2-if you are applying it to a DLCI, maximum-reservation does not apply,
so you can use up to 100% of the mincir
>
> 3-if you are using ATM, I really hope somebody else help us here. I
posted a question yesterday about this because I found two opposite
statements from Cisco. They are:
>
> =======================
> "The max-reserved bandwidth command is intended for use on main
interfaces
> only; it has no effect on virtual circuits (VCs) or ATM permanent
virtual
> circuits (PVCs)."
>
> from 'Low Latency Queueing with Priority Percentage Support', 12.2(2)T
New
> Feature
> (
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122newft/122
t/122t2/ftllqpct.htm
)
>
> "You now can increase the maximum reservable bandwidth value on ATM PVCs
> using the max-reserved-bandwidth command"
>
> from 'Comparing the bandwidth and priority Commands of a QoS Service
Policy'
> (
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk543/tk757/technologies_tech_note09186a0080
103eae.shtml
)
> =======================
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Please help support GroupStudy by purchasing your study materials from:
> http://shop.groupstudy.com
>
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
-- Cristian E. Henry REUNAE-mail: chenry@reuna.cl Fono: 56-2-3370336
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Aug 01 2004 - 10:12:05 GMT-3