FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)

From: srdja blagojevic (srdja1@pexim.co.yu)
Date: Thu Oct 12 2006 - 08:13:37 ART

• Next message: ghias hassan: "Re: FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)"
• Previous message: Sergio Silva: "Re: Regarding CBAC"
• Next in thread: ghias hassan: "Re: FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)"
• Maybe reply: ghias hassan: "Re: FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)"
• Maybe reply: Brian Dennis: "RE: FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)"
• Maybe reply: srdja blagojevic: "RE: FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

FR map for this task from solution guide is:

!
map-class frame-relay DLCI_504
frame-relay cir 768000
frame-relay bc 7680
frame-relay fragment 960

My solution was:

map-class frame-relay DLCI_504
frame-relay cir 768000
frame-relay tc 10
frame-relay fragment 960

 
I thought that since CIR=Bc/Tc, these two solution are the same.
Unfortunately, with sh traffic-shape, I found out that in the first case Tc
is 10 ms and in the second case is 63 ms. What is the purpose of this
command (frame-relay tc 10)if I can not set Tc with it?

What am I missing here? Why these two configurations are not generating same
show traffic-shape output?

Any good link explaining this difference?

TIA,
Srdja

• Next message: ghias hassan: "Re: FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)"
• Previous message: Sergio Silva: "Re: Regarding CBAC"
• Next in thread: ghias hassan: "Re: FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)"
• Maybe reply: ghias hassan: "Re: FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)"
• Maybe reply: Brian Dennis: "RE: FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)"
• Maybe reply: srdja blagojevic: "RE: FRTS: Tc and Bc (IEWB vol1 lab7 task 8.2)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Nov 01 2006 - 07:29:05 ART