From: Ben (bmunyao@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Jul 08 2007 - 15:56:30 ART
Antonio
Signalling from cisco voice gateways is typically H323, while ip pbxes like
callmanager use skinny if I'm not mistaken. The scenario would therefore
need to provide information on the signalling source, to determine which
protocol to classify.
The scenario would also need to specify the qos characteristics required for
this class, else one would have to make assumptions. One thing for sure is
that signalling is not voice, and so this traffic cannot be placed in the
same class if the question explicitly asked for prioritization of voice
traffic.
I hope those who've come across this dilemma in a lab setting will chip in.
Ben
On 7/8/07, Antonio Soares <amsoares@netcabo.pt> wrote:
>
> Hello Ben,
>
> I hope someone else joins us in this discussion. I'm really unsure how to
> deal with this in the lab.
>
> Your ACL is better (more specific) since RTP uses even UDP ports in that
> range as source and destination. RTCP uses odd ports in the same range. I
> think the only way to differentiate these two is with NBAR:
>
> !
> class-map match-all RTCP
> match protocol rtcp
> !
> class-map match-all RTP-VOICE
> match protocol rtp audio
> !
>
> But the signaling, i really don't know how to do.
>
> In the meanwhile i found that NBAR could help us here:
>
> !
> class-map match-any VOICE-SIGNALING
> match protocol h323
> match protocol mgcp
> match protocol sip
> match protocol skinny
> !
>
>
>
> Thanks,
> Antonio
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Ben [mailto:bmunyao@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* domingo, 8 de Julho de 2007 16:57
> *To:* Antonio Soares
> *Cc:* Cisco certification
> *Subject:* Re: QoS for Voice Calls - Should we care about Signaling ?
>
>
> Thats a good question. I have also seen some examples where the ACL method
> is implemented as follows:
>
> access-list 100 permit udp any range 16384 32767 any range 16384 32767
>
> Would it matter if one specifies or does not specify the source port
> range?
>
> TIA
>
> Ben
>
>
>
> On 7/8/07, Antonio Soares <amsoares@netcabo.pt> wrote:
> >
> > Hello group,
> >
> > I know that there are at least 2 ways to match RTP/RTCP packets:
> >
> > !
> > class-map match-all RTP-and-RTCP
> > match access-group 100
> > !
> > access-list 100 permit udp any any range 16384 32767
> > !
> >
> > OR
> >
> > !
> > class-map match-all RTP
> > match protocol rtp audio
> > match protocol rtcp
> > !
> >
> > But what about call signaling ? In the real world i know we must take it
> > into account but in the lab, should we care about it ? I found the list
> > bellow on a CCO document:
> >
> > H.323/H.225 = TCP 1720
> > H.323/H.245 = TCP 11xxx (Standard Connect)
> > H.323/H.245 = TCP 1720 (Fast Connect)
> > H.323/H.225 RAS = TCP 1719
> > Skinny = TCP 2000-2002 (CM Encore)
> > ICCP = TCP 8001-8002 (CM Encore)
> > MGCP = UDP 2427, TCP 2428 (CM Encore)
> > SIP= UDP 5060, TCP 5060 (configurable)
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Antonio
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Aug 18 2007 - 08:17:40 ART