From: Sean C (Upp_and_Upp@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue May 10 2005 - 10:17:54 GMT-3
Agreed. I wouldn't discount CAR anytime soon either.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lee Donald" <Lee.Donald@t-systems.co.uk>
To: "Dennis J. Hartmann" <dhartma5@optonline.net>; "'san'"
<san.study@gmail.com>; "'mani poopal'" <mani_ccie@yahoo.com>
Cc: <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 10, 2005 3:39 AM
Subject: RE: cisco press CCIE R & S LAB#5 QOS QUESTION page#327
> Dennis,
>
> I have recently sat the exam, and without breaking NDA, you're
> wrong....................
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis J. Hartmann [mailto:dhartma5@optonline.net]
> Sent: 10 May 2005 02:10
> To: 'san'; 'mani poopal'
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: cisco press CCIE R & S LAB#5 QOS QUESTION page#327
>
> I don't believe anyone will see a CAR question on the exam because
> the rate-limit command is a deprecated feature. The police command has
> replaced the rate-limit command. Notice that there's no PIR option in CAR
> (rate-limit). Rate-limit isn't even an option in the now EOS 3550 switch.
> On the 3550, you must police in the MQC. The exam bluepring states
> (policing), not rate-limit or CAR (even though CAR is a method of policing
> traffic).
>
> Sincerely,
> Dennis Hartmann
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
> san
> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2005 2:32 PM
> To: mani poopal
> Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: cisco press CCIE R & S LAB#5 QOS QUESTION page#327
>
> Mani,
>
> You probably have understood the question in a different manner.
> "Any Remaining traffic" means non -access-list of 101. If that is the
> case,
> we cannot use continue.
>
> Attaching good example from IP qos book , srinivas. on topic "continue"
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------
>
> Limiting a Particular Application's Traffic Rate at a Service Level A
> service provider has one of its premium customers define its traffic
> service
> level. All customer traffic except Hypertext Transfer Protocol
> (HTTP) (Web) traffic over a rate of 15 Mbps is marked with an IP
> Precedence
> of 4. HTTP traffic over a rate of 15 Mbps is transmitted with an IP
> Precedence of 0. The customer has a 30-Mbps service from the service
> provider.
>
> Limiting HTTP Traffic at a Service Level to a Specific Rate Interface
> Hssi1/0/0 rate-limit input 30000000 15000 15000 conform-action continue
> exceed-action drop rate-limit input access-group 101 15000000 10000 10000
> conform-action set-prec-transmit 4 exceed-action set-prec-transmit 0
> rate-limit input 30000000 15000 15000 conform-action set-prec-transmit
> 4 exceed-action set-prec-transmit 4
> !
> access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq www (1051 port talking to port
> 80)
> access-list 101 permit tcp any eq www any (( port 80 talking to 1051 ))
>
>
> The first CAR statement is used to rate-limit all incoming traffic to 30
> Mbps. It uses a continue action so that you continue to the next
> rate-limit
> statement. The second rate-limit statement is used to set the IP
> Precedence
> value for HTTP traffic based on its traffic rate.
> The last rate-limit statement is used to set the IP Precedence value to 4
> for all non-HTTP traffic
>
> /SAN
>
>
> On 5/9/05, mani poopal <mani_ccie@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hi Group,
>>
>> The question in the book is
>>
>> "configure CAR on R6 a3/0, so that web traffic will be sent but using ip
> precdence 5 for web traffic that conforms to the first rate policy, non
> conforming web traffic uses ip precedence 0. Any remaining traffic is
> limited to 8mbps, with normal burst size of 16,000 bytes and an excess
> burst
> size of 24000 bytes. Traffic that conforms should sent with ip precedence
> 5
> and traffic that does not conform should be dropped"
>>
>> solution in the book:
>> int atm3/0
>> rate-limit output access-group 101 20000000 24000 32000 confrom-action
>> set-prec-transmit 5 exceed-action set-prec-trasnmit 0 rate-limit
>> output 8000000 16000 24000 confrom-action set-prec-transmit 5
>> exceed-action drop
>>
>> access-list 101 permit tcp any any eq www
>>
>> Guys, I have 2 questions:
>> 1. for the first rate policy the limit is not given 2. I think the
>> first rate policy statement should be "rate-limit output access-group
>> 101 20000000 24000 32000 conform-action set-prec-transmit 5
>> exceed-action set-prec-continue 0 So the question is is set-prec-transmit
> 5 is right or it should be set-prec-continue 0, I think later is right
> because if you don't put continue it wont read the second rate-limit
> statement. Any suggestions are appreciated, I would be happy if scott,
> Brian or Marveen comes to give any suggestions to this doubt.
>> Again thanks a lot for all the answers.
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> Mani
>>
>> B.ENG,A+,CCNA,CCNP,CCNP-VOICE, CSS1,CNA,MCSE
>> (416)431 9929
>> MANI_CCIE@YAHOO.COM
>>
>> ---------------------------------
>> Yahoo! Mail Mobile
>> Take Yahoo! Mail with you! Check email on your mobile phone.
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________________
>> _ 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
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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 : Fri Jun 03 2005 - 10:11:57 GMT-3