From: Vincent Mashburn (vmashburn@fedex.com)
Date: Wed Nov 02 2005 - 14:59:34 GMT-3
Either will work, but the MQC way is more versatile and scalable.
Vince Mashburn
Engineer
901-263-5072
CCNP, CCDA, Network +
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Quetta Walla
Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 2005 11:51 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Difference between matching voice in map-class frame-relay or
in MQC
Hello,
Could some please explain what is the difference of matching voice in
MQC way using LLQ and then calling the policy-map inside map-class
frame-relay and the other option: directly matching and assigning
priority bandwidth within map-class fame-relay. Here is an example:
map-class frame-relay VOIPoverFR
frame-relay cir 256000
frame-relay bc 2560
frame-relay mincir 256000
frame-relay fair-queue
frame-relay fragment 320
frame-relay ip rtp priority 16384 16383 60
And the MQC way:
ip access-list extended VOICE
permit udp any any range 16348 32767
!
class-map match-all VOIP
match access-group name VOICE
!
policy-map VOICEpolicy
class VOIP
priority 60
class class-default
fair-queue
!
and then
map-class frame-relay VOIPoverFR
frame-relay cir 256000
frame-relay bc 2560
frame-relay mincir 256000
frame-relay fair-queue
frame-relay fragment 320
service-policy output VOICEpolicy
We can't do both, or matching voice inside map-class frame-relay will
take precedence.
Thanks.
--
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Dec 01 2005 - 09:12:05 GMT-3