RE: PBR and marking precedence 3

From: Schulz, Dave (DSchulz@dpsciences.com)
Date: Sun Nov 06 2005 - 20:54:00 GMT-3


Daniel -

I have tried something similar to this and it appears that there is
something related to the matching of traffic on the interface
(physical).....is seems (I don't know why) the router is not able to
take the traffic and assign everything (all packets) to a specific
precedence. It maybe related to what layer the policies are trying the
aggregate and disperse the traffic. Maybe one of the experts on GS can
explain this better.

Dave Schulz,
Email: dschulz@dpsciences.com

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Daniel Berlinski
Sent: Sunday, November 06, 2005 6:29 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: PBR and marking precedence 3

Hi Groupstudy
 
I'm trying to PBR traffic and set ip precedence 3 for all packets
matched in the following configs:
 
route-map PBR permit 10
 match interface FastEthernet0/1
 set ip precedence flash
 set ip next-hop 136.1.245.2
!

 
interface FastEthernet0/1
 ip address 136.1.57.5 255.255.255.0
 ip policy route-map PBR
 duplex auto
 speed auto
 
interface Serial0/0.245 multipoint
 ip address 136.1.245.5 255.255.255.0
 ip ospf message-digest-key 1 md5 CISCO
 ip ospf network point-to-multipoint
 ip ospf hello-interval 5
 frame-relay map ip 136.1.245.2 502 broadcast
 frame-relay map ip 136.1.245.4 504 broadcast

debug ip policy output shows that intended traffic is being PBRouted but
on the other end the show interface precedence command does not
increment precedence 3 matches. (I have enabled ip accounting
precedence input on the next-hop router)
 
Have I messed up with something related to the order of operations? Is
this the correct way of doing it?
Thanks a lot

This communication, including any attachments, is confidential. If you
are not the intended recipient, you should not read it - please contact
me immediately, destroy it, and do not copy or use any part of this
communication or disclose anything about it. Thank you. Please note that
this communication does not designate an information system for the
purposes of the Electronic Transactions Act 2002.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Dec 01 2005 - 09:12:05 GMT-3