RE: how come custom queueing need to take into consideration of

From: Michael Zuo (mzuo@ixiacom.com)
Date: Thu Mar 01 2007 - 04:10:18 ART

These are the steps the solution suggested. However, step 1 and 4 are
the reverse of each other. So they cancel out each other. Normalization
does not change the ratios. So this leaves the rounding up part which
causes the difference between my configuration and the solution (to
prove it, 4800/4*3.75=4500). Is there any reason the rounding up is
needed beyond making the numbers integers?

thanks

-----Original Message-----
From: Darrin K. Pierce [mailto:darrin@dkpierce.com]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 10:51 PM
To: Michael Zuo; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: how come custom queueing need to take into consideration of
packet size?

1. Divide the percentage by bytes
 - 20/1500; 30/600; 40/300

2. Normalize the numbers by dividing by the lowest number
 - .013333/.013333; .05/.013333; .133333/.013333
 - 1; 3.75; 10

3. Round Up! (I think you missed this step)
 - 1; 4; 10

4. Multiply by bytes to convert number ratio to size
 - 1*1500; 4*600; 10*300

1500; 2400; 3000
 - Which is equivalent to 3000; 4800; 6000

(Debatable as to whether smaller values should be used).

Darrin

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Michael Zuo
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 7:43 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: how come custom queueing need to take into consideration of
packet size?

Hi Group, this is one of the questions from Netmaster labs:

Configure custom-queueing so that:

20% for ftp, packet size 1500 bytes

30% for http, packet size 600 bytes

40% for udp, packet size 300 bytes

10% for the rest

The solution is

queue-list 1 queue 1 byte-count 3000
queue-list 1 queue 2 byte-count 4800
queue-list 1 queue 3 byte-count 6000

my solution is

queue-list 1 queue 1 byte-count 3000
queue-list 1 queue 2 byte-count 4500
queue-list 1 queue 3 byte-count 6000

I don't quite understand why packet size comes into play? If the
packets are smaller, that more packets will be sent with amount of bytes
allocated?

Thanks in advance....

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 01 2007 - 06:35:49 ART