From: Swan, Jay (jswan@sugf.com)
Date: Mon Jun 25 2007 - 14:19:47 ART
I believe the current QoS SRND recommends allocating 3% of link
bandwidth to CS6 control traffic.
On most platforms I think pak_priority should take care of IGPs, but it
doesn't provide for BGP or other control-type stuff like RSVP.
IS-IS is also a special case since it's not IP traffic, and thus doesn't
have a DSCP value.
Jay
#17783
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Gregory Gombas
Sent: Monday, June 25, 2007 11:03 AM
To: Group study
Subject: CBWFQ and pak_priority
I was wondering if you need to specify a seperate class-map for
routing protocols.
According to the following doc:
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk543/tk544/technologies_tech_note09186a
0080094612.shtml
On some platforms you need to specifically assign to a queue:
"In other words, on the Cisco 7500 series, if an output service-policy
is attached to the interface, then the packets are classified with
respect to the classes in that policy, and the pak_priority packet is
placed at the end of the chosen class queue. If the pak_priority
packet does not match any user defined class, then it is placed at the
tail of the class-default queue.".
What is the rule of thumb regarding routing protocol QOS?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Jul 01 2007 - 17:24:51 ART