From: Pavel Bykov (slidersv@gmail.com)
Date: Mon Dec 08 2008 - 08:01:56 ARST
Thanks.
Functionality of max-reserved-bandwidth did change with latest IOS, but not
by much.
You can see this in part 6 of tests on page 22 where testing was done with
an old IOS. There R2 and R3 which were in class-default should have gotten
at least something, because the command was set at "max-reserved-bandwidth
75", but they didn't and what they got was below 1%.
On Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 1:05 PM, <mihai.grigore@onlinehome.de> wrote:
> Pavel,
>
> I started all this from a statement written some time ago. This might have
> been
> true at the time of writing Doyle's book. In the meantime, Cisco has
> apparently
> changed how class-default works and that statement appears to be no longer
> valid.
>
> Thank you for your tests and clarifications, you did a great job with your
> tests!
> I read the pdf that you put on your server. Very thorough testing!!!
> Basically you conclusion is that max-reserved-bandwidth command is kind of
> useless.
>
> It looks like indeed that Cisco has changed the way how
> max-reserved-bandwidth
> command works and it will take some time to update the documentation, as
> usual.
>
> Many thanks again for your tests!
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-- Pavel Bykov ---------------- Don't forget to help stopping the braindumps, use of which reduces value of your certifications. Sign the petition at http://www.stopbraindumps.com/Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Thu Jan 01 2009 - 12:53:08 ARST