Re: FRTS vs MQC

From: gladston@br.ibm.com
Date: Mon May 02 2005 - 12:10:01 GMT-3


It seems Cisco does not follows the same Wendell's distinction between
FRTS and CB.
For Cisco, there is an intersection between both: CB Shaping would also be
FRTS configured using MQC.
For Wendell, they are two different worlds: FRTS and CB Shaping. MQC
would be used just to add different Queueing methods into FRTS.

======================
Cisco quoted
The MQC-Based Frame Relay Traffic Shaping feature provides users with the
ability to configure Frame Relay traffic shaping (FRTS) using Modular
Quality of Service (QoS) Command Line Interface (CLI) commands. Modular
QoS CLI is known as MQC.
======================

Oh, I can imagine a Lab question saying:
Title: CB Shaping
             Configure shaping on PVC between R1 and R3; does not
configure shaping between R1(hub) and R2.

And the Proctor's answer to the question "Should I configure MQC FRTS?"
would be: -There is enough information on your paper.

------------------------------------------------------------------
Gladston

"Bob Sinclair" <bsinclair@netmasterclass.net>
02/05/2005 11:12

To
Alaerte Gladston Vidali/Brazil/IBM@IBMBR, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
cc

Subject
Re: FRTS vs MQC

Gladston,
 
I will leave Odom's claim regarding FRF.12 to others, but for some reason
Odom continues to claim something that is obviously not true: In both
editions Odom claims you cannot enable MQC- based shaping on frame-relay
PVCs, but you most certainly can. Here is a link to accurate
documentation. And below is a working config demonstrating per-PVC
MQC-based shaping.
 
 
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122newft/122t/122t13/frqosmqc.htm
 
map-class frame-relay SHAPE
 service-policy output MQC-POLICY
 
 policy-map MQC-POLICY
  class class-default
   shape average 10000 8000 0
 
interface Serial1/0.1 multipoint
 bandwidth 64
 ip address 172.16.7.1 255.255.255.0
 frame-relay map ip 172.16.7.2 212 broadcast
 frame-relay map ip 172.16.7.3 213 broadcast
 frame-relay interface-dlci 212
  class SHAPE
 
R1#sh policy-map int
 Serial1/0.1: DLCI 212 -
 
  Service-policy output: MQC-POLICY
 
    Class-map: class-default (match-any)
      7864 packets, 819162 bytes
      5 minute offered rate 6000 bps, drop rate 0 bps
      Match: any
      Traffic Shaping
            Target/Average Byte Sustain Excess Interval
Increment
              Rate Limit bits/int bits/int (ms)
(bytes)
             10000/10000 1000 8000 0 800
1000
 
         Adapt Queue Packets Bytes Packets Bytes Shaping
        Active Depth Delayed Delayed Active
         - 0 7864 819162 352 37444 no
R1#
 
HTH,
 
Bob Sinclair
CCIE #10427, CCSI 30427, CISSP
www.netmasterclass.net
----- Original Message -----
From: gladston@br.ibm.com
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: FRTS vs MQC

Hi,

I would list these:

CB shaping does not support FRF.12 fragmentation on Frame Relay
subinterfaces and can not be enabled per-VC on multipoint Frame Relay.

From Wendell.

Make sense?



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Jun 03 2005 - 10:11:56 GMT-3