From: Michael Stout (michaelgstout@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat Jul 15 2006 - 18:27:34 ART
I think the priority queue has a built in policer, but i don't think it
is considerd to be a policer.
Just to try to give an exaple using a different concept.
requirements states " you may not use an extended access-list"
But a valid solution is to use a named access-list.
Sorry for the flacky answer
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: CCIEin2006 <ciscocciein2006@gmail.com>
Reply-To: CCIEin2006 <ciscocciein2006@gmail.com>
To: "Michael Stout" <michaelgstout@hotmail.com>
CC: cvictor@protokolgroup.com, jeffryanwn@hotmail.com,
ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: congestion avoidance question
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2006 17:11:56 -0400
Yes but doesn't priority command use a policing function which is
strictly
prohibited?
On 7/15/06, Michael Stout <michaelgstout@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> i agree.
>
> i think the guaranteed minimum bandwidth of 128k makes a priority
queue a
> requirement.
>
>
--------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: "Victor Cappuccio" <cvictor@protokolgroup.com>
> Reply-To: "Victor Cappuccio" <cvictor@protokolgroup.com>
> To: "'Jeff Ryan'" <jeffryanwn@hotmail.com>, "'Cisco
certification'"
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Subject: RE: congestion avoidance question
> Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2006 17:01:35 -0400
> Hi there Jeff,
>
> I think that
> class PREC_2 is using the priority 128 command.
>
> BTW I would like to know which workbook you are using, because I'm
> looking
> for a Workbook Specific to QOS Thanks
> Vmctor.-
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] En nombre
de
> Jeff
> Ryan
> Enviado el: Sabado, 15 de Julio de 2006 04:41 p.m.
> Para: Cisco certification
> Asunto: congestion avoidance question
>
> All, I'm doing a lab and it is aking me to make sure that all
traffic
> leaving
> FA 0/0 (VlanX) set with Precedence 3 AND/OR traffic from VlanX
> destined to
> BB1
> vlan has a guaranteed minimum bandwidth of 128k. Also, make sure
that
> in
> case
> of congestion that these packets get dropped randomly.
>
> Limit all traffic leaving FA 0/0 (VlanX) with Precedence 2 to 128k.
> DO NOT
> use
> policing or rate-limiting and DO NOT use an ACL to match IP
> Precedence.
>
> Does this look correct? Thanks in advance - Jeff
>
> --------
> R2#
> !
> ip cef
> !
> class-map match-any PREC_3_AND_OR_BB1
> match precedence 3
> match access-group 101
> class-map match-all PREC_2
> match precedence 2
> !
> !
> policy-map VLANX_OUT
> class PREC_3_AND_OR_BB1
> bandwidth 128
> random-detect
> class PREC_2
> shape average 128000
> !
> interface FastEthernet0/0
> service-policy output VLANX_OUT
> !
> access-list 101 permit ip 1.1.20.0 0.0.0.255 150.100.1.0 0.0.0.255
> !
>
>
_______________________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>
_______________________________________________________________________
> 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 : Tue Aug 01 2006 - 07:13:47 ART