From: jatinder.p.singh@bt.com
Date: Mon Mar 24 2008 - 08:01:57 ART
Sorry I have read the question wrong. My mind was thinking about serial Interface.
Regards
J PS ingh
________________________________
From: Gupta, Gopal (NWCC) [mailto:gopal.gupta@hp.com]
Sent: Mon 3/24/2008 10:11
To: Dhameeja,JPS,Jatinder,AXSC52 R; pbhatkoti@gmail.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: QoS marking - sub-interface vs main interface
Hi Jatinder,
Could you please elaborate, how would you do that under fast ethernet interface based on DLCIs ?
Thanks,
Gops
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of jatinder.p.singh@bt.com
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 15:28
To: pbhatkoti@gmail.com; ccielab@groupstudy.com
Subject: RE: QoS marking - sub-interface vs main interface
Importance: Low
Dear Frog,
I dont know what u r planning to accomblish here. But both are wrong answer. U always have to apply Service policy input or output under Interface DLCI commands not direct on interface.
Regards
J P Singh
________________________________
From: nobody@groupstudy.com on behalf of Radioactive Frog
Sent: Mon 3/24/2008 05:17
To: ccie forum
Subject: QoS marking - sub-interface vs main interface
Option1:
-------------
interface fas0/0
service-policy input BLOCK
interface fas0/0.100
ip add 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
interface fas0/0.200
ip add 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
Option2:
-------------
interface fas0/0
interface fas0/0.100
ip add 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
service-policy input BLOCK
interface fas0/0.200
ip add 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
Question1: Will option1, will apply to sub-interface fas0/0.100 and fas0/0.200.
Qusetion2: Will option2, only apply to fas0/0.100
My answers are: option1 - YES, option2- yes.
Can someone confirm if i am on the right track?
frog
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Apr 01 2008 - 07:53:54 ART