From: Victor Cappuccio (cvictor@protokolgroup.com)
Date: Thu Oct 05 2006 - 15:44:50 ART
Hi there,
The difference consist in the order you put your classes inside the policy
map
In your second example you put VINES Traffic along with the complete BW
Available, and you would shape to 5Mbps the rest, if you are using a
Ethernet Interface you would police 8000 of that 5 Mbps remaining
In your first Example you create a hierarchy, So all Traffic being shaped at
5Mbps creating a buffer space to hold on packets when the BC is reached (or
filled and/or you have no more credit to use BE or BE = BC), so you would
police Vines traffic to 8000 of that Queue you just created in the router
Thanks
Victor.-
-----Mensaje original-----
De: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] En nombre de
msaeed@uaeu.ac.ae
Enviado el: Jueves, 05 de Octubre de 2006 02:44 p.m.
Para: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Asunto: Nested Policy Map Question
Here is the confoguration:
conf t
class-map match-any DOWNLOAD
match protocol vines
match protocol xns
!
policy-map POLICE
class DOWNLOAD
police 8000
exit
exit
policy-map SHAPE
class class-default
shape average 5000000 160000 80000
service-policy POLICE
int s1
service-policy out SHAPE
end
wr
So, basically here I am haping the trafiic on the interface to 5MB and
then with in that policy map I am policing the traffic to XNS and vines
protocols to 8000 bits per second. Now whats the differenece if I apply
the same requirements using two classes under same policy map? Here is
the other solution
conf t
class-map match-any DOWNLOAD
match protocol vines
match protocol xns
!
policy-map SHAPE
class class-default
shape average 5000000 160000 80000
class DOWNLOAD
police 8000
int s1
service-policy out SHAPE
end
wr
Regards,
Mohammad Zahid Saeed
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Nov 01 2006 - 07:29:04 ART