From: Guyler, Rik (rguyler@shp-dayton.org)
Date: Thu Jul 28 2005 - 15:00:28 GMT-3
Thanks for all the input. Do you think the MQC service policy would be
more/less/same resource intensive than PBR? I only filter on the inbound
so either would work.
Rik
-----Original Message-----
From: Brian McGahan [mailto:bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 1:07 PM
To: James Ventre; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: Nesting ACLs
You could actually do it with both (policy routing or MQC).
With policy routing this could be applied only inbound with the 'ip policy
route-map' interface level command, however the MQC service-policy could be
applied inbound or outbound. Ideally though you would want to drop traffic
as you receive it, not as you go to send it, so you don't have to waste
cycles in the routing lookup and switching process.
HTH,
Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> James Ventre
> Sent: Thursday, July 28, 2005 9:09 AM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Re: Nesting ACLs
>
> not a service-policy - but an ip policy applied to the interface
> (sorry - been doing a lot of QoS lately)
>
> James
>
>
>
> James Ventre wrote:
>
> > What about some type of serivce-policy applied interface that
matches
> > against the nested ACL's ... and sends all matching traffic to Null0
?
> >
> > James
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Sep 04 2005 - 17:00:31 GMT-3