From: Sadiq Yakasai (sadiqtanko@gmail.com)
Date: Fri Mar 13 2009 - 20:19:39 ARST
Without paying too much attention to the values you have provided, I would
say yes, you are correct. One applies to all PVCs on the interface, which
the other one only applies to the DLCI in question.
Ohh, yeah, the second case should be using a map-class frame-relay SHAPE and
not class-map frame-relay SHAPE :-)
Im sure it was only a typo.
HTH,
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 9:52 PM, Usama Pervaiz <chaudri@gmail.com> wrote:
> Here is the senario:
> R1 has an access rate of 64 Kbps. R1 should be able to burst up to its
> access
> rate unless congestion is experienced, in which case it should slow
> down its rate,
> but it should not go below 32 Kbps.
>
> R1 s0/0 ----- R2 s0/0
> DLCI:102
>
> What is the difference between these 2 configs??:
>
> 1st config:
>
> policy-map QOS
> class class-default
> shape average 64000 8000 0
> Shape adaptive 32000
> !
> int s0/0
> service-policy output QOS
>
> 2nd config
>
> policy-map QOS
> class class-default
> shape average 64000 8000 0
> Shape adaptive 32000
> !
> class-map frame-relay SHAPE
> service-policy output QOS
> !
> int s0/0
> frame-relay interface-dlsci 102
> class SHAPE
>
>
> Is the main difference that one applies to all PVC's while the 2n
> dapplies only to DLCI 102??
>
> Any and all help is appreciated!
>
> Thanks,
> Usama
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
-- CCIE #19963Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Mon Apr 06 2009 - 06:44:05 ART