From: Ahmed Elhoussiny (aelhoussiny@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Mar 15 2009 - 06:13:03 ART
Dear All,
C6500 is capable of QOS Classification & marking on the IP level
when it use the SE that supports the PFC 2 & 3
PFC1 doesn't support these features.Thats what i remember.
Its about the SE that is installed in the C6500.
XYZ-6509-MLS1#sh mod
Mod Ports Card Type Model Serial
No.
--- ----- -------------------------------------- ------------------
-----------
2 24 CEF720 24 port 1000mb SFP WS-X6724-SFP
SAL1201C5AD
3 24 CEF720 24 port 1000mb SFP WS-X6724-SFP
SAL124594UR
4 48 CEF720 48 port 10/100/1000mb Ethernet WS-X6748-GE-TX
SAL1201BRUS
*5 2 Supervisor Engine 720 (Active) WS-SUP720-3B
SAL1152BK1Y<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<*
6 2 Supervisor Engine 720 (Hot) WS-SUP720-3B
SAL1201BU71
7 48 CEF720 48 port 10/100/1000mb Ethernet WS-X6748-GE-TX
SAL1202CBFN
8 48 CEF720 48 port 10/100/1000mb Ethernet WS-X6748-GE-TX
SAL1201C5HF
9 48 CEF720 48 port 10/100/1000mb Ethernet WS-X6748-GE-TX
SAL1201C5JR
Mod Sub-Module Model Serial Hw
Status
---- --------------------------- ------------------ ----------- -------
-------
2 Distributed Forwarding Card WS-F6700-DFC3C SAL1201BZZ3 1.0 Ok
3 Centralized Forwarding Card WS-F6700-CFC SAL12459EDF 4.1 Ok
4 Distributed Forwarding Card WS-F6700-DFC3C SAL1201BZZL 1.0 Ok
* 5 Policy Feature Card 3 WS-F6K-PFC3B SAL1151B2KR 2.3
Ok<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<*
5 MSFC3 Daughterboard WS-SUP720 SAL1152BKCH 3.1 Ok
6 Policy Feature Card 3 WS-F6K-PFC3B SAL1201C2HB 2.3 Ok
6 MSFC3 Daughterboard WS-SUP720 SAL1201BSDU 3.1 Ok
7 Distributed Forwarding Card WS-F6700-DFC3C SAL1202CB3F 1.0 Ok
8 Distributed Forwarding Card WS-F6700-DFC3C SAL1201BQSQ 1.0 Ok
9 Distributed Forwarding Card WS-F6700-DFC3C SAL1201BYGK 1.0 Ok
Thanks & B.regards
*Ahmed Elhoussiny,CCIE # 21988
Network Consultant & Cisco Academy Instructor *
On Sat, Mar 14, 2009 at 6:15 AM, dave dave <funccie@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Joe,
>
> I think you are right on on consultant paid point, but what about us who
get
> only montly paid & cant priovide better solution (as which not exists on
QoS
> for 6500 ).
>
> I think cisco has to work a lot on swithing QoS to make it unique in
config
> on all platform as well make it better on 6500, which hopefully will not
be
> choice in next few year once Juniper/huwai/AL start working on switching
> more hard. Alcate-Lucent in my own experience on MSP box is amazing.
>
> Regards
> Dave
>
>
> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Joseph L. Brunner
> <joe@affirmedsystems.com>wrote:
>
>> I think they invented Cat 6509 QOS for consultants to get some extra
>> billable hours
>>
>>
>>
>> Most 6509 s are maytag repairmen with multiple phd s in mechanical
>> engineering they have way to much brains with nothing to use them on
>>
>>
>>
>> First run prtg or opmanager on the chassis for a week If your system
>> traffic EVER exceeds 10% during production you re good. I would put some
>> control plane security for other nasty things to prevent dos s on the
box.
>>
>>
>>
>> Search emule there are some nice networkers presentations floating
around
>> on security the 6509 from dos s with cpp
>>
>>
>>
>> -Joe
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* dave dave [mailto:funccie@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Friday, March 13, 2009 1:02 PM
>> *To:* Joseph L. Brunner
>> *Cc:* Cisco certification
>> *Subject:* Re: [Real World] 6500 QoS making me crazy..:(
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi Joseph & All Expert,
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks Joseph for sharing your experience. I laso wanted to know if i
stick
>> to PFC QoS with PQ, how can i ensure in 100% of voice traffic load also i
>> can configure my box such a way that my Control Plane traffic wont
> lost...is
>> it possible????
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Dave
>>
>> On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Joseph L. Brunner <
>> joe@affirmedsystems.com> wrote:
>>
>> This has never been in an issue in over 100 sites I have worked on,
>> deployed and tested the 6509E, etc.
>>
>> My experience, no matter how hard you are driving the network (oracle
rac,
>> sun backups, Symantec backups, etc) the 6509 always has another 50 to
>> 100Mbps to give...
>>
>> We once tried this (you'll like this)- a perl script to dump data from 3
>> Redhat boxes to a single port where a cisco ip phone was on a 6509
Gigabit
>> port... I wanted to convince management to invest the consulting hours in
a
>> qos deployment on about 9 6509E's... I could not get the voice call to
>> jitter at all... he was on the phone with me talking fine even under that
>> stress (and the packets it made it there, per span!!!)
>>
>> Like I said these switches always have something more to give even on the
>> cheaper non-server asic'd blades... seems it doesn't let anyone flow use
it
>> all.
>>
>> -Joe
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>> dave dave
>> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 4:47 AM
>> To: Cisco certification
>> Subject: [Real World] 6500 QoS making me crazy..:(
>>
>> Hi Expert,
>>
>> *Catalyst 6500 Release 12.2SXH *
>>
>> SERVER-|-ACCESS-Router---L2-link---1g----------|
>> |
>>
>>
>
SERVER-|-ACCES-Router---L2-link---1g-------------|---*1g--Dis-SW6500---10g*--
> ------L2-Link--------------------------Core
>> Router
>> |
>> SERVER-|-ACCES-Router---L2-link---1g-------------|
>>
>>
>> If i configure priority Queue which can take 100% BW, so it means
priority
>> traffic from different Access-Router aggregated to 100% of uplink of
>> Aggregation switch to Core roure , all other traffic including control
>> plane
>> will be dropped. Is there is any work around for this. I can only do
>> hardware-switched QoS.
>>
>> 6500 QoS
>>
>>
>
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/switches/lan/catalyst6500/ios/12.2SX/configur
> ation/guide/qos.html
>>
>> 6500 QoS Note from above URL
>> For hardware-switched traffic, PFC QoS does not support the bandwidth,
>> priority, queue-limit, or random-detect policy map class commands. You
can
>> configure these commands because they can be used for software-switched
>> traffic.
>> Does it mean that i need to disable mls switching to do the harware based
>> swithing. I cant do the software based switching because that will not be
>> good for the heavy traffic load considering my network, which may put
hugh
>> CPU load on my 6500 aggregation box.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>> Dave
>>
>> 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
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> 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 Apr 06 2009 - 06:44:05 ART