From: shiran guez (shiranp3@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Nov 03 2007 - 08:37:27 ART
ok after tested here are the result:
under the sub interface:
R5(config-subif)#service-policy output FRTS
CBWFQ : Not supported on sub interfaces
so under the sub interface you can either work with the nested solution of
either MQC in LEGACY map class and enable traffic shaping. or you can work
with MQC nested in MQC nested like you offered, but from the easiest option
is what they given in the SG
doing MQC on the main interface, as you have only specific traffic type and
only one DLCI so you do not have different policy for different DLCI
consideration here.
all will work but the simplest I think is the preferred.
Thanks, I learned something today. as normally like you I would have went on
the logical solution one of the nested solutions but here it makes you think
that you need to look and understand the big picture as in that case R5 is
connected with R3 over FR with Point to Point no hub and spoke.
the nested MQC in MQC will work also for that solution but if you had a hub
and spoke you would need to use the MQC inside the Legacy traffic shaping.
On 11/3/07, Champika G <693455@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Let me know your findings, shiran.
>
> Cheers
>
> On 11/3/07, shiran guez <shiranp3@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I will test it my self later on today. as I am not to sure about the
> nested
> > under the subint
> > usually when I work with FR subint i use the legacy map-class FR and if
> i
> > need to put some newer MQC i nest the MQC inside the map-class.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/3/07, Champika G <693455@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > You have to use a nested policy if applying to a Subif. My initial Qn
> > > was the SG applies it under physical interface, and not under the
> > > subif.
> > > It could be that there is only one p2p subif between the two networks,
> > > and therefore the config applied to the phsyical interface is
> > > inherited by the subif.
> > >
> > > Infact when i tested it under the physical interface. I was getting
> > > matches for that policy map. Just want to clarify whats the best way
> > > to do this?
> > >
> > > Champika
> > >
> > > On 11/3/07, shiran guez <shiranp3@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > yes, it need to be set under the subinterface.
> > > >
> > > > On 11/3/07, Champika G <693455@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Hi Shiran
> > > > > Shouldnt the Queining policy be applied on to the subinterface and
> not
> > > > > the physical interface, since IP config is on the subif?
> > > > >
> > > > > Champ
> > > > >
> > > > > On 11/2/07, shiran guez <shiranp3@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > why would you need here nested policy?
> > > > > > also you are not asked to shape traffic just to gurntee 256Kbps
> for
> > that
> > > > > > specific host and protocol.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > policy-map BW
> > > > > > class SMTP
> > > > > > bandwidth 256
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 11/2/07, Champika G < 693455@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This task says that SMTP traffic from and to the server over
> the
> > FR
> > > > > > > cloud should be guaranteed 256 KBPS. The port speed is at
> 512KBPS
> > in
> > > > > > > the FR links.
> > > > > > > R3 & R5 are connected to the FR cloud via two subinterfaces.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I assume that the right eay to do it is by configuring a
> > heirarchical
> > > > > > > policy map and appyling it to the sub interface. But the SG
> uses a
> > > > > > > noremal policymap with bandwidth command and applies it to the
> > > > > > > phsyical interface. Isnt this wrong ??
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My config was;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > class-map match-all SMTP
> > > > > > > match access-group name SMTP
> > > > > > > !
> > > > > > > !
> > > > > > > policy-map BW
> > > > > > > class SMTP
> > > > > > > bandwidth 256
> > > > > > > policy-map PARENT
> > > > > > > class class-default
> > > > > > > shape average 256000
> > > > > > > service-policy BW
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > interface Serial0/0.1 point-to-point
> > > > > > > bandwidth 512
> > > > > > > backup delay 1 1
> > > > > > > backup interface Serial0/1
> > > > > > > ip address 132.1.35.5 255.255.255.0
> > > > > > > frame-relay interface-dlci 513
> > > > > > > service-policy output PARENT
> > > > > > > !
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ip access-list extended SMTP
> > > > > > > permit tcp any host 132.1.3.100 eq smtp
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Appreciate some help please? THanks
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Champ
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > _______________________________________________________________________
> > > > > > > Subscription information may be found at:
> > > > > > > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Shiran Guez
> > > > > > MCSE CCNP NCE1
> > > > > > http://cciep3.blogspot.com
> > > > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/cciep3
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > > Shiran Guez
> > > > MCSE CCNP NCE1
> > > > http://cciep3.blogspot.com
> > > > http://www.linkedin.com/in/cciep3
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > Shiran Guez
> > MCSE CCNP NCE1
> > http://cciep3.blogspot.com
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/cciep3
>
-- Shiran Guez MCSE CCNP NCE1 http://cciep3.blogspot.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/cciep3
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Dec 01 2007 - 06:37:27 ART