Re: Priority vs Policing

 I thought you could achieve priority by using policing in CBWFQ

Thanks for clarifying

On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 2:45 PM, <ron.wilkerson_at_gmail.com> wrote:

> Long way of saying you understand both features properly.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: "Jacob Uecker" <juecker_at_ccbootcamp.com>
>
> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 05:36:27
> To: Molomo<letjedilakopa_at_gmail.com>; <ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
> Subject: RE: Priority vs Policing
>
>
> The part that's important for voice traffic is that LLQ (using the priority
> keyword) traffic is send before other queues. This means that delay
> sensitive
> traffic (such as voice) will suffer the least from congestion.
>
> Using Policing and LLQ are two different animals and are used for different
> applications. You wouldn't use the priority keyword to do policing and
> vice
> versa.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jacob Uecker
> CCIE# 24481
>
> Development Engineer
> CCBOOTCAMP - Cisco Learning Partner (CLP)
> Toll Free: 877-654-2243
> International: +1-702-968-5100
> Skype: skype:ccbootcamp?call
> FAX: +1-702-446-8012
>
> YES! We take Cisco Learning Credits!
>
> Training And Remote Racks: http://www.ccbootcamp.com
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com on behalf of Molomo
> Sent: Wed 7/29/2009 5:30 AM
> To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
> Subject: Priority vs Policing
>
> Experts,
> Correct me if I'm wrong on the understanding of Priority and Policing in a
> policy-map , MQC.
>
> policy-map POLICY_MAP
> class VOICE
> priority 30
>
> Traffic in this class will be gauranteed maximum 30Kbps bandwidth and will
> always be send first. When there is no congestion excess traffic will be
> forwared but not prioritized and during congestion excess traffic will de
> dropped.
>
> policy-map POLICY_MAP
> class VOICE
> police 30000 1000 conform-action transmit exceed-action drop -
>
> Traffic in this class will ALWAYS be rate limited to 30Kbps congestion or
> not, conforming traffic will be transmitted and excess dropped.
>
> Now if my understanding is correct why is it that in most
> implementations voice traffice is used with priority (LLQ). IMO it will
> make
> more sense to use policing for voice class because ideally you would
> always want voice traffic strict policed- congestion or no congestion.
>
> Or am I missing something?
>
>
> Rgds,
> Molomo
>
>
> 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
Received on Wed Jul 29 2009 - 14:57:54 ART