RE: WFQ and WRED

From: Filyurin, Yan (yan.filyurin@eds.com)
Date: Wed Apr 25 2007 - 13:26:27 ART


So does it mean that each of the 64 queues will be subject to WRED, or
that WRED will take place before packets are placed into dynamic queues.
This is what it sounds according to CISCO documentation.

FOr example what would happen if I were to do something like that:

policy-map mypolicy
   class class-default
      fair-queue
      random-detect
      queue-limit 100

?

Thank you

________________________________

        From: eicc tester [mailto:reto_ccie@yahoo.com]
        Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2007 6:28 PM
        To: Filyurin, Yan; ccielab@groupstudy.com
        Subject: Re: WFQ and WRED

        Remember that queues in WFQ are automatically create and the
maximun default is 64, then for the life of the queue (for temporary
flow), all WRED setting are valid.

        "Filyurin, Yan" <yan.filyurin@eds.com> wrote:

                Hello esteemed members group study. I have a rather
stupid QOS question
                that has to do with using WFQ and WRED simultaneously.
If were to take
                an interface or a class in a policy map to that I would
apply fair-queue
                configuration with default settings and then also
random-detect with
                default or non-default setting. Assuming that default
WFQ settings are
                64 queues, would it mean that by applying WRED, I would
effective give
                random detect capability to each one of those queues?
Does it sound
                right and would it ever make sense to do it?

                Thank you!



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue May 01 2007 - 08:28:37 ART