From: aet Blr (getaet@ymail.com)
Date: Sun Nov 02 2008 - 13:33:57 ARST
Hi Is it not applicable to be I mean we are configuring be only in R1 so
R2 is going to drop traffic sent by R1 with be
--- On Sun, 11/2/08, aet Blr <getaet@ymail.com> wrote:
From: aet Blr <getaet@ymail.com>
Subject: Re: Soup to Nuts Qos section lab no 14 t
To: robclav@gmail.com
Cc: ccielab@groupstudy.com
Date: Sunday, November 2, 2008, 3:08 PM
--- On Sun, 11/2/08, Rob Clav <robclav@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Rob Clav <robclav@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Soup to Nuts Qos section lab no 14 t
To: "aet Blr" <getaet@ymail.com>
Date: Sunday, November 2, 2008, 2:21 PM
I have no access to these labs, but It make sense that you need to
configure cir and mincir at R2 to mantain at least mincir when sending
traffic. Otherwise R2 can drop the average down of mincir configured
at R1.
hope this help,
Roberto
2008/11/2 aet Blr <getaet@ymail.com>:
> In Narbiks Soup to Nuts Qos section lab no 14 the task states
> " R1 should be able to busrst above 64 kbps if there are no
congestion,
> however if congestion occurs , it should drop its rate down to 32 kbps
"
>
>
> In solution in R1 bc , be , mincir is configured properly , &
> in R2 bc & mincir configuration is done . My doubt is that why we
need
> bc & mincir configuration in R2 ?
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Dec 01 2008 - 08:18:28 ARST