From: Scott Morris (smorris@ipexpert.com)
Date: Tue Nov 13 2007 - 23:48:52 ART
dscp mutation would only change things set at one dscp value to be another.
Technically, it should probably say 'packet' since frames don't have DSCP
values, nor do non-IP protocols. :)
but yes, that solution would work (at least as long as you remember to put
the service-policy input on the interface!
Scott Morris, CCIE4 (R&S/ISP-Dial/Security/Service Provider) #4713, JNCIE-M
#153, JNCIS-ER, CISSP, et al.
CCSI/JNCI-M/JNCI-ER
VP - Technical Training - IPexpert, Inc.
IPexpert Sr. Technical Instructor
A Cisco Learning Partner - We Accept Learning Credits!
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
http://www.ipexpert.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
Biggs, Jeff (M/CIO/BIE)
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 12:15 PM
To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: IPEXPERT lab 22
Asks for ports 14 and 16 on CAT2 to have DSCP AF32 assigned to all frames
arriving on those ports.
Would this work:
class-map match-all QOS
match access-group 101
!
!
policy-map QOS
class QOS
set dscp af32
access-list 101 permit ip any any
Or because of the word "Frame", would this require the DSCP-Mutation only?
Jeffrey Biggs
Sr. Network Engineer
USAID
M/CIO/BIE
240-646-5003
jbiggs@usaid.gov <mailto:jbiggs@usaid.gov>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Dec 01 2007 - 06:37:29 ART