From: ccie2be (ccie2be@nyc.rr.com)
Date: Sat Nov 20 2004 - 12:50:46 GMT-3
Kevin,
I'm glad my questions help keep your mind in high gear. And, so to keep the
process going, here's another one for you from a previous post.
Considering compression methods, is Predictor cisco proprietary or standards
based? I know Stac is proprieatry but I haven't seen anything on Predictor
that says one way or the other.
And, from experience, I know Cisco likes to throw curve balls at you by
saying something like RTR X is connected to a non-cisco router, do blah,
blah. So, whenever I see the code word, "non-cisco" router (or switch), I
think that whatever it is that needs to be done, it needs to be done by
using a Standards based method versus how it could be done otherwise.
Thanks, Tim
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin" <h_kvn@yahoo.com>
To: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 10:16 AM
Subject: Re: MQC - Nested Class-maps
> Hi Tim,
>
> I believe that the situation has been fixed in the new IOS releases. I
learned this
> technique in a class that I took, and they must have been using older IOS
releases. In the
> past, I believe that if you tried to put a queuing technique on a subint
it would not be
> allowed (Thus the situation was fixed by nesting a queued class). I tried
putting the
> queuing on the first level class today and it worked fine. Maybe it was a
bug that Cisco
> fixed?
>
> By the way, I am learning alot from all the questions that you have been
posting, keep them
> coming. Thanks.
>
> Kevin
>
> --- ccie2be <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey Kevin,
> >
> > Thanks for your response.
> >
> > Would it be possible to see an example of what you mean of your third
> > reason? I'm not sure I follow that reason.
> >
> > Thanks, Tim
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kevin" <h_kvn@yahoo.com>
> > To: "Kian Wah Lai" <kian_wah@qala.com.sg>; "ccie2be"
<ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
> > Cc: "Group Study" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, November 20, 2004 9:22 AM
> > Subject: Re: MQC - Nested Class-maps
> >
> >
> > > I see nested class maps needed in 3 situations:
> > > 1. Class reuse (as stated before)
> > > 2. If you need to use a match-all within a match-any
> > > class or vice versa (listed on Doc CD).
> > > 3. To use queuing on a subinterface (Shaping is
> > > allowed by default, but queuing only allowed if
> > > calling a nested service-class).
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > >
> > > --- Kian Wah Lai <kian_wah@qala.com.sg> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Nested class-maps saves you from re-typing the same
> > > > thing again only i
> > > > believe so I don't think there are any. Whatever you
> > > > can do in class-map
> > > > A can be done in class-map B.
> > > >
> > > > Anyone else?
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Kian Wah
> > > > 3 routers and one PIX rental at SGD2/hr
> > > > http://rack.sgcug.org/
> > > > Singapore Cisco User Group
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ccie2be wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Hi Kian,
> > > > >
> > > > >As your example illustrates, the nested class-map
> > > > structure wasn't required.
> > > > >The same result could be achieved without the
> > > > nesting. Are there any
> > > > >requirements which can only be fulfilled by using
> > > > nested class-maps?
> > > > >
> > > > >I've tried to come up with requirements that
> > > > required using nested
> > > > >class-maps, but everytime I saw the same results
> > > > could be gotten wihtout
> > > > >nesting.
> > > > >
> > > > >Thanks, Tim
> > > > >----- Original Message -----
> > > > >From: "Kian Wah Lai" <kian_wah@qala.com.sg>
> > > > >To: "ccie2be" <ccie2be@nyc.rr.com>
> > > > >Cc: "Group Study" <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> > > > >Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2004 9:26 AM
> > > > >Subject: Re: MQC - Nested Class-maps
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>class-map A
> > > > >> match access-group 1
> > > > >> match protocol ip
> > > > >> match fr-de
> > > > >>
> > > > >>class-map B
> > > > >> match class-map A
> > > > >> match ip prec 5
> > > > >>
> > > > >>OR
> > > > >>
> > > > >>class-map B
> > > > >> match access-group 1
> > > > >> match protocol ip
> > > > >> match fr-de
> > > > >> match ip pre 5
> > > > >>
> > > > >>Reuse what you've created :) (reminds me of OOP in
> > > > programming). Save
> > > > >>you time from typing everything again. For more
> > > > info:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122newft/12
> > 2tcr/122tqr/qftcmd4.htm#wp1098391
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>Regards,
> > > > >>Kian Wah
> > > > >>3 routers and one PIX rental at SGD2/hr
> > > > >>http://rack.sgcug.org/
> > > > >>Singapore Cisco User Group
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>ccie2be wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>>Hi guys,
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>I'm trying to think of a scenario where using a
> > > > nested class-map would be
> > > > >>>required or even the best way of fulfilling a
> > > > requirement. So far, no
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >luck.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>>If someone could come up with an example of this
> > > > being needed, I would
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >greatly
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >>>appreciate it.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>class-map PARENT
> > > > >>> match class-map CHILD
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>If you do this, you can see that this is a valid
> > > > option.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>class-map Parent
> > > > >>> match ?
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>TIA, Tim
> > > > >>>
> > > >
> > >
>>>_______________________________________________________________________
> > > > >>>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 - 06:57:48 GMT-3