From: Brian McGahan (bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com)
Date: Mon Oct 30 2006 - 12:32:08 ART
Queueing mechanisms are only outbound. These include bandwidth
reservations, prioritization, WRED, WFQ, and shaping. Since
policing/CAR are not queueing mechanisms they can be configured inbound
and outbound. There are some differences between the police statement
and the rate-limit statement. With the legacy rate-limit statement you
can configured nested rate-limiting with the "continue" statement that
allows you to check further rate-limit statements in the policy. With
the police statement in the MQC you have the option to use a three-rate
policer. Overall they accomplish the same goal unless you need a very
granular policy.
HTH,
Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593 (R&S/SP)
bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Zuo [mailto:mzuo@ixiacom.com]
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 2:23 AM
> To: Skinner, Stephen; Brian McGahan; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Clarification of QOS commands and what they do .
>
> If I am not mistaken :). "shape" only can be used for out, not in.
>
> Brian, quick question: can "police"/MQC do 100% of what "rate-limit"
> does?
>
> thanks
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> Skinner, Stephen
> Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 11:20 AM
> To: Brian McGahan; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Clarification of QOS commands and what they do .
>
> Brian ,
>
> Thank you again ,
>
> Stephen Skinner
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian McGahan [mailto:bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com]
> Sent: 26 October 2006 17:37
> To: Skinner, Stephen; ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: RE: Clarification of QOS commands and what they do .
>
> *** WARNING : This message originates from the Internet ***
>
> Stephen,
>
> See inline.
>
> Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593 (R&S/SP)
> bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
>
> Internetwork Expert, Inc.
> http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
> Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
> Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
> 24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
> Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
> Of
> > Skinner, Stephen
> > Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 10:27 AM
> > To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> > Subject: Clarification of QOS commands and what they do .
> >
> > Guys
> >
> > Can someone clarify this for me .
> >
> > These are the 5 Major commands used in QOS and my explanations for
> them .
> >
> >
> > RATE-LIMIT - Old NON-MQC version of police .IN and OUT , cant use
> policy
> > maps , uses ACL to match traffic
>
> Yes.
>
> > POLICE - In and Out , uses MQC , can use policy-maps ,
>
> Must use policy-maps.
>
> > SHAPE , reserves bandwidth for class and buffers excess, uses MQC
>
> Shaping does not reserve traffic, it simply smoothes it out to the
> specified
> rate.
>
> > PRIORITY, Gives priority access to the hardware buffer for a certain
> > amount of traffic , drops excess. Uses MQC
>
> Excess is only dropped if there is congestion. Otherwise excess is
just
> not
> guaranteed low latency.
>
> > BANDWIDTH - allocates fixed amount of guaranteed bandwidth , best
> effort
> > for
> > excess traffic ( excess gets put with everyone else, or dropped)
uses
> MQC.
>
> Yes.
>
> > I know these are Rough answers , but to me they are pretty much the
> > difference between the commands .
> >
> > Please feel free to expand on them .
> >
> >
> > Many thanks in advance
> >
> > Stephen Skinner
> >
> >
> >
> > The Royal Bank of Scotland plc, Registered in Scotland No. 90312.
> > Registered Office: 36 St Andrew Square, Edinburgh EH2 2YB
> >
> > Authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority.
> >
> > This e-mail message is confidential and for use by the addressee
only.
> If
> > the message is received by anyone other than the addressee, please
> return
> > the message to the sender by replying to it and then delete the
> message
> > from your computer. Internet e-mails are not necessarily secure. The
> Royal
> > Bank of Scotland plc does not accept responsibility for changes made
> to
> > this message after it was sent.
> >
> > Whilst all reasonable care has been taken to avoid the transmission
of
>
> > viruses, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that
the
> > onward transmission, opening or use of this message and any
> attachments
> > will not adversely affect its systems or data. No responsibility is
> > accepted by The Royal Bank of Scotland plc in this regard and the
> > recipient should carry out such virus and other checks as it
considers
>
> > appropriate.
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Nov 01 2006 - 07:29:07 ART