From: Swaroop Potdar (swarooppotdar@hotmail.com)
Date: Fri Nov 12 2004 - 08:02:09 GMT-3
de-list and de-group vs MQC are two different things...
but the set fr-de in MQC is incorporation of this feature of setting the
de-bit in a specific situation.
WIth the kind of nested logic MQC uses we have more granular control over
the traffic where in the group or list command we dont have so much control
where things are quite explicit.
Its the same like asking whats the difference btwn
the WRED configured on the interface and WRED used in MQC.
nothing the feature remains the same but used in a different fashion and
logic in each case
>From: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
>Reply-To: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
>To: "Swaroop Potdar" <swarooppotdar@hotmail.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: Re: f/r discard eligible
>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 10:28:50 -0500
>
>Thanks Swaroop.
>
>That's what I was thinking.
>
>So, you agree with me that's there's no such thing in Frame Relay as a
>"DON'T DISCARD" setting.
>
>There's only a DISCARD ELIGIBLE setting.
>
>And, therefore the only way to make some traffic NOT Discard Eligible is to
>make all other traffic Discard Eligible. You agree?
>
>I have a couple other questions that maybe you could help me out with
>regarding DE.
>
>1) What's the difference, if any, between using the MQC to set the DE bit
>and using the frame relay de-group and de-list commands?
>
>
>2) If I have a frame relay interface with sub-interfaces, if the DE is
>applied at the physical level, will all the sub-interfaces inherit the
>setting?
>
>Thanks again. I appreciate the help. Tim
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Swaroop Potdar" <swarooppotdar@hotmail.com>
>To: <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Sent: Thursday, November 11, 2004 8:22 AM
>Subject: RE: f/r discard eligible
>
>
> > Class
> > {
> > Use the match not (protocol) or (acces-group) ! all this traffic will
>pass
> > untouched.
> > !
> > and use the command set fr-de ( this will be for the rest of your
>traffic,
> > when congested this will be dropped first)
> > }
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >From: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
> > >Reply-To: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
> > >To: "Group Study" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > >Subject: f/r discard eligible
> > >Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2004 07:43:58 -0500
> > >
> > >Hi guys,
> > >
> > >I know how to make traffic discard eligible, but is it possible to
> > >explicitly
> > >make some traffic not discard eligible?
> > >
> > >For example, if I'm running a routing protocol over f/r, can I make it
>so
> > >that
> > >the routing protocol is not discard eligible or do I have to make all
>other
> > >traffic discard eligible?
> > >
> > >Thanks, Tim
> > >
> > >_______________________________________________________________________
> > >Subscription information may be found at:
> > >http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Swaroop.
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Life Is Short & Sweet.
> > Live It To The Fullest.
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > The happening world of BPO! Know all that you need to know!
> > http://www.bpowatchindia.com/msn/ Keep in step with whats hot!
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Regards,
Swaroop.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Life Is Short & Sweet.
Live It To The Fullest.
------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Dec 02 2004 - 06:57:42 GMT-3