From: James (james@towardex.com)
Date: Thu Sep 16 2004 - 03:44:25 GMT-3
On Wed, Sep 15, 2004 at 03:21:22PM +0000, ccie cert wrote:
> yes. i agree
Brian, et, al,
Thanks for the clarification! I get it now :)
-J
>
>
> >From: "Brian McGahan" <bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com>
> >Reply-To: "Brian McGahan" <bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com>
> >To: <gladston@br.ibm.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> >Subject: RE: ip rtp priority quickie..question
> >Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 11:08:29 -0400
> >
> >> Using CBWQF you can use "match ip rtp..." and "match access-group name
> >> CONTROL"
> >> to select both, them "police-map xxxx", "class VOICE" and finally
> >> "priority yy".
> >
> > If you do this with both types of traffic in the same class-map
> >make sure you change the class-map to be "match-any" as opposed to the
> >default "match-all". You can also have multiple classes within the same
> >policy that are in the LLQ. This method is used when you want X amount
> >of bandwidth as priority for class A, and Y amount of bandwidth for
> >priority for class B.
> >
> >
> >HTH,
> >
> >Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
> >bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
> >
> >Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> >http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
> >Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
> >Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
> >24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
> >Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> >Of
> >> gladston@br.ibm.com
> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2004 8:01 AM
> >> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> >> Subject: Re: ip rtp priority quickie..question
> >>
> >> ======
> >> quoted
> >> When using 'ip rtp priority <start range> <range> <bandwidth>' under
> >intf
> >> configuration, my guess is that it matches only the voice "payload"
> >> traffic
> >> within the range defined, but does not match the control tcp/1720
> >> traffic..
> >> Is this a correct assumption?
> >> ======
> >>
> >> Yes, that's right. You need (if you want) to priorize 1720 with
> >another
> >> feature.
> >>
> >> Previous post said it maybe be alright to let control without priority
> >> because it is TCP.
> >>
> >> Using CBWQF you can use "match ip rtp..." and "match access-group name
> >> CONTROL"
> >> to select both, them "police-map xxxx", "class VOICE" and finally
> >> "priority yy".
> >>
> >>
> >_______________________________________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
> >_______________________________________________________________________
> >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
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Au1G A$:8 0!@e :|8#0m FmGO0T :8=G <v @V=@4O4Y. MSN Au1G/Eu@Z
> http://www.msn.co.kr/stock/
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
-- James Jun TowardEX Technologies, Inc. Technical Lead Network Design, Consulting, IT Outsourcing james@towardex.com Boston-based Colocation & Bandwidth Services cell: 1(978)-394-2867 web: http://www.towardex.com , noc: www.twdx.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Oct 01 2004 - 15:00:44 GMT-3