From: Scott Morris (swm@emanon.com)
Date: Tue Sep 05 2006 - 08:54:33 ART
Festive... I never paid attention to what MQC did with the reserved queues.
In that case, your other command would be correct.
So if your goal is ONLY the queuing/discard/depth thresholds, then yes both
would be identical.
With MQC, obviously we get much more granular control over different classes
of traffic rather than treating the entire interface as one.
Sorry about the confusion.
Scott
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Angelo De Guzman
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 4:30 AM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com; swm@emanon.com
Subject: Re(2): QOS - Simple
Thanks Scott!
But the sh queueing for both command reveals the same values for Discard
Threshold, Dynamic queues and reserved queues. Can you please explain
further.
R2#sh run | in policy-map
!
policy-map policy1
class class-default
fair-queue
queue-limit 25
!
R2#sh run int s0/0
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 352 bytes
!
interface Serial0/0
ip address 137.10.45.2 255.255.255.240
ip authentication mode eigrp 100 md5
ip authentication key-chain eigrp 100 EIGRPKEY encapsulation frame-relay
no dce-terminal-timing-enable frame-relay map ip 137.10.45.2 204
frame-relay map ip 137.10.45.4 204 broadcast no frame-relay inverse-arp
service-policy output policy1 end R2#sh queueing Current fair queue
configuration:
Interface Discard Dynamic Reserved Link Priority
threshold queues queues queues queues
Serial0/0 25 256 256 8 1
Serial0/1 64 256 0 8 1
USING WFQ
!
interface Serial0/0
ip address 137.10.45.2 255.255.255.240
ip authentication mode eigrp 100 md5
ip authentication key-chain eigrp 100 EIGRPKEY encapsulation frame-relay
no dce-terminal-timing-enable fair-queue 25 256 256 frame-relay map ip
137.10.45.2 204 frame-relay map ip 137.10.45.4 204 broadcast no
frame-relay inverse-arp end
R2(config-if)#do sh queueing
Current fair queue configuration:
Interface Discard Dynamic Reserved Link Priority
threshold queues queues queues queues
Serial0/0 25 256 256 8 1
Serial0/1 64 256 0 8 1
USING THE Values that you gave it reveals this.
fair-queue 25 256 0
R2#sh queueing
Current fair queue configuration:
Interface Discard Dynamic Reserved Link Priority
threshold queues queues queues queues
Serial0/0 25 256 0 8 1
Serial0/1 64 256 0 8 1
Scott Morris (9/5/06 4:15 PM):
>
>To be identical, your first command would be "fair-queue 25 256 0"
>
>The last parameter is the number of reserved queues (default = 0).
>
>HTH,
>
>
>Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713,
>JNCIE #153, CISSP, et al.
>CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-J
>IPExpert VP - Curriculum Development
>IPExpert Sr. Technical Instructor
>smorris@ipexpert.com
>http://www.ipexpert.com
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>Angelo De Guzman
>Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 2:52 AM
>To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
>Subject: QOS - Simple
>
>Hi,
>
> Is this the same?
>
>1. fair queue 25 256 256
>
>2. policy-map MYPOLICY
> class class-default
> fair-queue
> queue-limit 25
>
>Just want to confirm. If they do how would you call them?
>
>Angelo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>***********************
>No virus was detected in the attachment no filename
>
>Your mail has been scanned by InterScan MSS.
>***********-***********
>
>_______________________________________________________________________
>Subscription information may be found at:
>http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>***********************
>No virus was detected in the attachment no filename
>
>Your mail has been scanned by InterScan MSS.
>***********-***********
>
***********************
No virus was detected in the attachment no filename
Your mail has been scanned by InterScan MSS.
***********-***********
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Oct 01 2006 - 16:55:39 ART