From: John Matus (jmatus@pacbell.net)
Date: Sat Nov 13 2004 - 22:33:42 GMT-3
actaully, both configs were correct..........i left out "priority X" under
CBWFQ because i wasn't sure how that translated to "frame ip rtp pri 16384
16383" since there is also no specific priority indicated <i.e.- 75%> how
doest this second statement decide what the priority is??.....lets try
again, since i now see on my router that i forgot to specify bandwidth.....
map-classs frame frts
frame ip rtp priority 16384 16383 200
and
map-class frame frts
service policy out rtp
class-map match-all rtp
match pro ip rtp pri 16384 16383
policy-map rtp
class rtp
bandwidth 200
ok,,,,,, now is there any functional difference ?
Regards,
John D. Matus
MCSE, CCNP
Office: 818-782-2061
Cell: 818-430-8372
jmatus@pacbell.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
To: "Joe Chang" <changjoe@earthlink.net>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 4:43 PM
Subject: Re: ip rtp priorty with frts
> Hey Joe,
>
> I think the 2nd example was just incomplete. I suspect the 2nd was meant
> to
> look like this:
>
> map-class frame frts
> service policy out rtp
>
> class-map match-all rtp
> match prot ip rtp 16384 16383
>
> policy-map rtp
> class rtp
> priority X
>
> I think there was another mistake (or typo) that confused the issue a bit.
> In the 2nd example under the class-map, the match prot statement had match
> prot ip rtp **pri** 16384 16383 instead of match prot ip rtp 16384 16383.
>
> Also, I think the above DOES create a strict priority queue for rtp
> traffic,
> assuming the 2nd example as shown above is what was meant. In fact, the
> example above is also known as LLQ. So, it's my thought that both examples
> do the same thing.
>
> Do you agree?
>
> Tim
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joe Chang" <changjoe@earthlink.net>
> To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2004 7:04 PM
> Subject: Re: ip rtp priorty with frts
>
>
>> The first config:
>>
>> > map-classs frame frts
>> > frame ip rtp priority 16384 16383
>>
>> creates a priority queue for rtp traffic, in addition to the other
>> shaping
> queues FRTS utilizes.
>>
>> The second config:
>>
>> > map-class frame frts
>> > service policy out rtp
>> >
>> > class-map match-all rtp
>> > match pro ip rtp pri 16384 16383
>> >
>> > policy-map rtp
>> > class rtp...............
>>
>> creates a CBWFQ shaping queue, but does not seem to prioritze the rtp
> traffic.
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> 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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Dec 02 2004 - 06:57:43 GMT-3