From: Victor Cappuccio (cvictor@protokolgroup.com)
Date: Wed Nov 02 2005 - 06:22:02 GMT-3
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk652/tk698/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080094af9.shtml
--- Victor Cappuccio cvictor@protokolgroup.com ..O. ....O OOO ----- Original Message ----- From: "Scott Morris" <swm@emanon.com> To: "'Sam Munzani'" <sam@munzani.com>; <ccielab@groupstudy.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 12:04 PM Subject: RE: Frame Relay traffic shaping question> For REAL LIFE stuff, consider this: > > While it's nice to back off when the SP network says they're congested > (BECN/FECN), why on Earth would you choose to back off to a number less than > what you are paying for??? In your config below, you pay for 128K CIR to > the provider, yet you are telling your router it's ok to drop back to 64K > (mincir) when they complain. Yet, you still pay for it. > > In your example though, you have a mathematical problem. 5 spokes at > guaranteed 128K CIR exceeds the hubs 512K CIR. Usually, PVCs are set up > where both ends have guarantees, so are you sure that your hub doesn't > really have 5 x 128K CIR's? > > With mismatched numbers, you're going to find that things don't quite add up > nicely and may take some playing with based on what applications you're > running and where they're going to. I would suggest though, that you adjust > the CIR you are actually paying for, knowing that you can burst above that > speed (SP burst, not your own configured burst) but don't back down less > than what you are guaranteed. That may mean adjusting your bill a bit. > > FRTS is what you want to achieve. BECN's, FECN's and mincir is the bare > minimum that you will achieve from the SP standpoint (what you are truly > paying for in SP-based CIR). > > HTH, > > Scott > > > -----Original Message----- > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Sam > Munzani > Sent: Tuesday, November 01, 2005 10:45 AM > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com > Subject: Frame Relay traffic shaping question > > What's best approach for frame-relay traffic shape in following > configuration? > Hub (1024K line, 512K CIR) > | > ------------------------------------------ > | | | | | > Site A B C D E > > All remote sites are 256K line speed with 128K CIR. > > Here is my dilemma, > If I configure following parameters at all sites, the hub site will start > shaping when it reaches 128K. If I configure hub site with 512K of CIR, it > can saturate remote site since remotes are small CIR. > > map-class frame-relay frame-shape > frame-relay cir 128000 > frame-relay mincir 64000 > frame-relay adaptive-shaping becn > frame-relay bc 8000 > frame-relay be 16000 > > Here is the approach I am thinking of: > 1. Configure hub with sub interfaces. > 2. Have sub interface parameters match remote site paramters. > > Does it make sense? Any better option? > > Thanks, > Sam > > _______________________________________________________________________ > 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 : Thu Dec 01 2005 - 09:12:04 GMT-3