From: Russell Kelly \(rukelly\) (rukelly@cisco.com)
Date: Wed Jul 19 2006 - 13:13:14 ART
I would imagine it would be round-robin-like to the transmit ring on the
phy interface -- but at least you would 'guarantee' the priority
bandwidth for each and none of them can 'run out of control'
With the below you don't know the split is and either could hog the
priority bandwidth allocated:
policy-map buz
class voice_or_voice2
priority 20 (kbps)
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Stefan Grey
Sent: 19 July 2006 16:56
To: ivan@iip.net; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: Re: bandwidth and priority??
Ok which of the classes below would have the biggest priority and the
smallest priority according to PQ?? Which queue will be dequeued first??
policy-map buz
class voice
priority 10 (kbps)
class voice2
priority 10 (kbps)
class voice3
priority 30 (kbps)
Thanks
> > I have read a nice whitepaper and have a nice question:
> > Do the below class-maps mean the same or they differ?? If differ
> > than
>how??
> >
> > policy-map buz
> > class voice
> > priority 10 (kbps)
> >
> > policy-map buz2
> > class voice
> > bandwidth 10
> > police 10 (kbps)
> >
> > Any thoughts??? Both maps guarantee equal 10 kbps.
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Customise your home page with RSS feeds at MSN Ireland!
>http://ie.msn.com/
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________________
> > ___ Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>--
>Ivan
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>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 - 07:13:48 ART