RE: QoS - Marking - Policing

From: csica (csica@liweb.net)
Date: Wed Aug 16 2006 - 00:04:54 ART

• Next message: Tim Chan: "EIGRP Variance"
• Previous message: Scott Morris: "RE: ospf strange problem !!!"
• Maybe in reply to: Udo Konstantin: "QoS - Marking - Policing"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Hi Udo,

I think this config may work for the second question. Anyone please feel
free to verify.

Thanks,
Chris

VLANA = 172.16.10.0/24
VLANB = 172.16.20.0/24
X = 3

!
access-list 100 permit ip 172.16.10.0 0.0.0.255 172.16.20.0 0.0.0.255
!
class-map match-any PREC3
 match access-group 100
 match precedence 3
!
class-map match-all PREC4
 match precedence 4
!
policy-map QOS
 class-map PREC3
  bandwidth 128
  random-detect
 class-map PREC4
  police 128000
!
end

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of Udo
Konstantin
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 1:02 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: QoS - Marking - Policing

Hi group,

I had the challenge on a given interface to mark traffic up to 128 k
with precedence 3 and above with 1. I shouldn't use rate-limit.

Also on a given fastethernet IF I should mark all traffic coming with
precedence x and/or coming from VLANA -> VLANB guarantee a minimum
bandwidth of 128k. In case of congestion drop randomly (?!?!?) ->
WRED ??!?!
Traffic with precedence 4 limit to 128k

any help for me ??

udo

• Next message: Tim Chan: "EIGRP Variance"
• Previous message: Scott Morris: "RE: ospf strange problem !!!"
• Maybe in reply to: Udo Konstantin: "QoS - Marking - Policing"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Sep 01 2006 - 15:41:57 ART