RE: MQC shape vs peak command confusion

Naveen,

Based on the default behavior of peak shaping and the requirements in the problem, it would seem your solution is most correct.

Rack1R1(config-pmap-c)#shape peak 64000 640 640
less than 1000 bits in an interval doesn't make sense

If they had chosen a value any higher than 200k, you could have completed the requirement using the default equation of a BE+BC where BC equals BE. I'd like for some more comments on this as well, shape peak is one of those fuzzy topics.

-ryan

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of naveen M S
Sent: Saturday, April 04, 2009 12:27 AM
To: ccielab
Subject: MQC shape vs peak command confusion

Group,

Here is my task :

1) Shape HTTP traffic to a peak rate of 128kbps sent out to Vlan 34.
2) Use Bc and Be bursts based on 10ms interval.

*My solution was -*

class-map HTTP
   match protocol http
policy-map SHAPE
   class HTTP
* shape peak 128000 1280 0*
interface gig 0/0
   service-policy output SHAPE

Rack1R1(config-pmap-c)#* do sh policy-map int gig0/0*
           Target/Average Byte Sustain Excess Interval Increment
             Rate Limit bits/int bits/int (ms) (bytes)
           128000/128000 160 1280 0 10 160

*The workbook solution was -*

class-map HTTP
   match protocol http
policy-map SHAPE
   class HTTP
* shape peak 64000 6400 6400*
interface gig 0/0
   service-policy output SHAPE

Rack1R1(config-pmap-c)# *do sh policy-map int gig0/0*
           Target/Average Byte Sustain Excess Interval Increment
             Rate Limit bits/int bits/int (ms) (bytes)
           128000/64000 1600 6400 6400 100 1600

What difference it makes to the peak output rate when either of the 2
statements are given ?

1) shape peak 128000 1280
2) shape peak 64000 6400 6400

Thanks,
Naveen.

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Sat Apr 04 2009 - 09:33:08 ART