From: David Duncon (david_ccie@hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Dec 27 2004 - 22:58:49 GMT-3
Appreciate your feedback, Bob.
As I did not quite get your point (attached clip bellow) , can you please
elaborate ?
<clip> it does not decrease available bandwidth on the interface. <clip>
Cheers
- David
>From: "Bob Sinclair" <bsin@cox.net>
>To: "David Duncon" <david_ccie@hotmail.com>,<ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Subject: Re: Class class-default
>Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 08:17:17 -0500
>
>David,
>
>I would say definitely option 1. Is the bandwidth command really effective
>in class class-default? On my box it takes the command, but it does not
>show up in the output of "show policy-map interface," and it does not
>decrease available bandwidth on the interface.
>
>HTH,
>
>Bob Sinclair
>CCIE #10427, CCSI 30427, CISSP
>www.netmasterclass.net
>
>----- Original Message ----- From: "David Duncon" <david_ccie@hotmail.com>
>To: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
>Sent: Monday, December 27, 2004 2:54 AM
>Subject: Class class-default
>
>
>>Hi Group,
>>
>>I got a Q on MQC 'c class class-default behavior. And appreciate your
>>guidance on this.
>>
>>On production network, let us consider that we have end to end L3 MQC
>>policy which primarily aimed to protect Business critical apps such as
>>Voice and Citrix and bundled every other traffic type such as File
>>transfers , HTTP and Emails ..etc in to a common default class with random
>>detect feature enabled. Since there is a bit of concern on the email (MS
>>Exchange & Lotus Notes Domino) traffic with in a default class as we are
>>seeing some drops there. So If we were to segregate & prioritize email
>>traffic from the rest of default class traffic , then which of the
>>following options is the better way to go. Either to leave the email
>>traffic with in class class-default and assign a guaranteed bandwidth or
>>to segregate email traffic in to separate class-map with in policy-map.
>>The reason I am asking this Q is to understand any negative impacts the
>>NON time sensitive email traffic can bring in to policy maps processing
>>where already time sensitive traffic types (Voice & citrix) are being
>>serviced.
>>
>>
>>Option 1:
>>=================
>>
>>Policy-map data
>>
>>Class voice
>>Match access-group xxx
>>Priority xxx
>>
>>Class citrix
>>Match access-group xxx
>>Bandwidth xxx
>>
>>Class email
>>Match access-group xxx
>>Bandwidth xxx
>>
>>Class class-default
>>Random detect
>>
>>Option 2:
>>==================
>>
>>Policy-map data
>>
>>Class voice
>>Match access-group xxx
>>Priority xxx
>>
>>Class citrix
>>Match access-group xxx
>>Bandwidth xxx
>>
>>Class class-default
>>Random detect
>>Bandwidth xxx ---------------------------------------> emails are bundled
>>together along with file transfers & HTTP traffic with in class default.
>>
>>
>>And my Qs are :
>>
>>1) is there any way where we can create 2 class-maps with in class
>>class-default , one for email and the rest for all default traffic ? If
>>yes is there any benefit in doing that ?
>>
>>2) or is it safe for me to create another class-map for email and slot
>>that in with policy-map itself along with voice & citrix and dedicate
>>certain amount of bandwidth to it.
>>
>>3) Thirdly , what is the between a class class-default with a bandwidth
>>command and one with out a bandwidth command. And also what is the
>>difference between a class class-default with a random detect command and
>>one with out it. Though I do aware the functionality of congestion
>>avoidance techniques such as WRED and RED , I was in the impression that
>>besides configuring random detect , you need to map it to a relevant DSCP
>>code which underlines a certain level of drop probability. In other words,
>>you are telling the policy engine on what type of traffic you want her to
>>drop should she pick up any early congestion warnings.
>>
>>
>>Any feed back is much appreciated.
>>
>>- David.
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>SEEK: Now with over 60,000 dream jobs! Click here:
>>http://ninemsn.seek.com.au?hotmail
>>
>>_______________________________________________________________________
>>Subscription information may be found at:
>>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Jan 03 2005 - 10:31:30 GMT-3