From: Ian Blaney (ian.blaney@gmail.com)
Date: Thu Feb 15 2007 - 13:04:22 ART
Still confused - not difficult :o)
Is this a mistake in CCO documentation or in my head. Probably the latter :)
In CCO they give an example
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios124/124cr/hqos_r/qos_s1h.htm#wp1085303
The following example uses peak rate shaping to ensure a bandwidth of 300
kbps but allow throughput up to 512 kbps if enough bandwidth is available on
the interface:
bandwidth 300
shape peak 512000
They use 512000 and not 256000
On 2/15/07, Blastmor <alextols@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> shape peak 32000 cause shaping rate in that case will be 64000
>
> 2007/2/15, Ian Blaney <ian.blaney@gmail.com>:
> >
> > To answer the original question
> >
> > If there is available bandwidth on the interface class2 should be shaped
> > to
> > 64K peak.
> >
> > would it be
> >
> > shape peak 64000
> >
> > or
> >
> > shape peak 32000
> >
> > On 2/15/07, Troy Levin < troylevin@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The formula to calculate the actual peak rate is:
> > >
> > > Peak rate = cir(1+be/bc)
> > >
> > >
> > > So in your case in order to send be+be traffic in one TC the shaper
> > must
> > > send at the rate of 128k. The rate does become higher than 64k.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/14/07 4:49 PM, "Ian Blaney" <ian.blaney@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi GS
> > > >
> > > > I am slightly confused about the wording and meaning here.
> > > >
> > > > class1 should be shaped to 64K
> > > > If there is available bandwidth on the interface class2 should be
> > shaped
> > > to
> > > > 64K peak.
> > > >
> > > > I have configured the following
> > > >
> > > > policy-map SHAPE
> > > > class class1
> > > > shape average 64000
> > > > class class2
> > > > shape peak 64000
> > > >
> > > > interface Serial0/0
> > > > service-policy output SHAPE
> > > >
> > > > If I look at the following
> > > >
> > > > R1#show policy-map interface s0/0
> > > > Serial0/0
> > > >
> > > > Service-policy output: SHAPE
> > > >
> > > > Class-map: class1 (match-all)
> > > > 0 packets, 0 bytes
> > > > 5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
> > > > Match: none
> > > > Traffic Shaping
> > > > Target/Average Byte Sustain
> > > Excess Interval Increment
> > > > Rate
> > Limit bits/int bits/int (ms) (bytes)
> > > > 64000/64000 2000 8000 8000 125
> > 1000
> > > >
> > > > Adapt Queue Packets Bytes Packets Bytes
> > Shaping
> > > > Active Depth Delayed Delayed
> > Active
> > > > - 0 0 0 0 0 no
> > > >
> > > > Class-map: class2 (match-all)
> > > > 0 packets, 0 bytes
> > > > 5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
> > > > Match: none
> > > > Traffic Shaping
> > > > Target/Average Byte Sustain
> > > Excess Interval Increment
> > > > Rate
> > Limit bits/int bits/int (ms) (bytes)
> > > > 128000/64000 2000 8000 8000 125
> > 2000
> > > >
> > > > Adapt Queue Packets Bytes Packets Bytes
> > Shaping
> > > > Active Depth Delayed Delayed
> > Active
> > > > - 0 0 0 0 0 no
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Class2 has the output
> > > >
> > > > Target/Average
> > > > Rate
> > > > 128000/64000
> > > >
> > > > I understand that with shape peak each Tc Bc+Be bits can be sent but
> > I
> > > am
> > > > confused with the 128000 under the Target Rate. Does this still meet
> > the
> > > > specs of the original question "If there is available bandwidth on
> > the
> > > > interface class2 should be shaped to 64K
> > > > peak."
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > >
> > > >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >
>
>
>
> --
> SY, Alexey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Mar 01 2007 - 07:38:46 ART