From: Chris Lewis \(chrlewis\) (chrlewis@cisco.com)
Date: Wed Jun 22 2005 - 20:11:52 GMT-3
Hi,
What I was trying to illustrate (and on reflection as it is a real world
example, it may not be too useful in the context of CCIE lab
preparation), is the use of MQC to classify and apply different queuing
policies to different types of traffic within the one DLCI.
In the context of this mailer, what is best is what the question asks
for :)
Personally, it seems easier to me (if you have the freedom) to use the
frame-relay statements in a map class to define the per DLCI behavior
(cir, mincir, Bc and so forth), and if you want to add hierarchy within
that DLCI, to add a service-policy within the map-class to get the per
traffic type behavior.
Cheers
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
glcassels3
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 9:15 PM
To: bsinclair@netmasterclass.net; ccielab@groupstudy.com; Chris Lewis
(chrlewis)
Subject: Re: RE: MQC-Based FRTS
Bob and Chris,
Could the difference here be that in Chris's example the shaping is
done under the map-class and not a nested policy? This example leads me
to another question though. Is it best to do the shaping under a nested
policy config and then only used under a map-class frame-relay to affect
only a certain PVC, or perform the shaping under the map-class and only
do the bandwidth statements under the MQC?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Jul 06 2005 - 14:43:42 GMT-3