From: Ivan (ivan@iip.net)
Date: Sun Jul 16 2006 - 18:26:52 ART
Hello !
It is true in 3550 there is not such action on police command. I wrote message
by memory without checking on hardware and remember this action from Cat6k.
Sorry again for erroneous mail.
On Monday 17 July 2006 00:48, Victor Cappuccio wrote:
> Hello, please sorry to put my nose here, but there is no conform action in
> the 3550 Policer.
>
> Rack6Sw1(config-pmap-c)#police ?
>
> <8000-1000000000> Bits per second
>
> aggregate Choose aggregate policer for current class
>
>
>
> Rack6Sw1(config-pmap-c)#police 8000 ?
>
> <8000-2000000> Normal burst bytes
>
>
>
> Rack6Sw1(config-pmap-c)#police 8000 8000 ?
>
> exceed-action action when rate is exceeded
>
> <cr>
>
>
>
> Rack6Sw1(config-pmap-c)#police 8000 8000 ex
>
> Rack6Sw1(config-pmap-c)#police 8000 8000 exceed-action ?
>
> drop drop packet
>
> policed-dscp-transmit change dscp per policed-dscp map and send it
>
>
>
> Rack6Sw1(config-pmap-c)#police 8000 8000 exceed-action
> policed-dscp-transmit?
> <cr>
>
>
>
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] En nombre de Ivan
> Enviado el: Domingo, 16 de Julio de 2006 03:45 p.m.
> Para: ccielab@groupstudy.com; Jeff Ryan
> Asunto: Re: CLASS MAP on 3550
>
> on 3550 packet can be marked only with policing or explicitly marked trough
> cos. Ip precedense it is part of dscp, therefore you can set dscp.
>
> --------
> class-map match-all xxx
> match access-group 1
>
> police-map xxx
> match xxx
> police 64000 conform-action set-ipprec 5 exceed-action set-ipprec 5
>
> --------
> int f0/8
> mls qos cos 1
> mls qos cos override
>
> mls qos map cos-dscp 0 40 16 24 32 40 48 56
> ^^
>
> > All, I was wondering what your thoughts are to a lab scenerio I am doing
> > now as shown below:
> >
> >
> > SW1 FA0/8 is assigned to VLAN 12 which has some critical servers on it.
> > Mark all packets on VLAN 12 with IP Precedence of Critical.
> > --------
> > Rack1SW1#
> > mls qos
> > !
> > ip cef
> > !
> > class-map match-all VLAN_12
> > match access-group 1
> > !
> > policy-map IP_PREC
> > class VLAN_12
> > set ip precedence 5
> > !
> > access-list 1 permit any
> > !
> > interface FastEthernet0/8
> > switchport mode access
> > service-policy input IP_PREC
> >
> >
> > OR, is this class-map method more preferred...
> >
> >
> > class-map match-all VLAN_12
> > match access-group 1
> > match vlan12
> > !
> > policy-map IP_PREC
> > class VLAN_12
> > set ip precedence 5
> > !
> > access-list 1 permit any
> > !
> > interface FastEthernet0/8
> > switchport mode access
> > service-policy input IP_PREC
> > !
> >
> > To me, the first method is shorter and seems to meet the requirements
>
> since
>
> > it matches "all packets" on th eswitch interface that is in Vlan 12. Your
> > thoughts?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Jeff
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
-- Ivan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Aug 01 2006 - 07:13:47 ART