From: darth router (darklordrouter@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Jan 07 2008 - 00:44:10 ARST
Under class PREC2
why not just do bandwidth 128, I don't see anywhere in the question where it
indicates you need to shape. The bandwidth statement is also a form a
policing, so you'd have to clarify with the proctor, whether he meant not to
use ratelimit/police or ot not use the commands "rate limit" or "police"
Also, shape peak 128000 really sends 256000 per interval, so you definitely
don't want that to happen.
DR
On 1/6/08, Mark Turner <markturner101@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am trying to solve the below question. I have included the
> configuration that I believe will work. I am just unclear as to the
> best method to rate limit to a specific value if rate limiting and
> policing are specifically forbidden. I have narrowed it down to the
> shape average, shape peak or bandwidth statement but cant decide which
> to use.
>
> "Configure R2 so that traffic marked with the precedence value 3
> AND/OR traffic from VLAN_C (1.1.1.1) to VLAN_BB2 (2.2.2.2) is
> guaranteed minimum of 128K of bandwidth when sent out of interface
> fast 0/0. If congestion occurs assure this traffic is randomly
> dropped. Also make sure that traffic marked with prec value 2 is rate
> limited to 128K. Do not use rate-limiting or policing."
>
> Access-list 100 permit ip 1.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 2.2.2.0 0.0.0.255
>
> class-map match-any prec3
> match ip precedence 3
> match access-group name prec3
> !
> class-map match-any PREC2
> match ip precedence 2
> !
> policy-map cisco
> class VLANC-TO-VLAN_BB2
> bandwidth 128
> random-detect
> class PREC2
> shape average 128000 -> my best guess
>
> OR
> class PREC2
> shape peak 128000
>
> OR
> class PREC2
> bandwidth 128
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Fri Feb 01 2008 - 10:37:58 ARST