Re: LLQ with Bandwidth MQC

The "priority" queue will have it's bandwidth reserved just like the
"bandwidth" queues will. The distinction between them is that the priority
queue gets served first and it has an internal policer so that it can never
use unused bandwidth from another queue (like bandwidth queues can).

In your example you need to use "max-reserved-bandwidth 100" as that is the
only way to meet your requirements.

-- 
Cheers,
Jared Scrivener, CCIE3 #16983 (R&S, Sec, SP), CISSP
Instructor, Mentor, Consultant
Homepage: www.JaredScrivener.com
Email: Jared_at_JaredScrivener.com
Twitter: ascentience
LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/in/jaredscrivener
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 5:24 AM, S Malik <ccie.09_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> All,
> I have deliberately configured three classes with BW statement under a
> policy-map so that it consume 75% of BW.
>
> Fourth class I configured with priority %25. Now I could configure
> service-policy out on interface by changing "max-reserve bw 76%.
>
> I think, BW 25% command under policy-map means minimum 25% and priority 25%
> means upto 25%.
>
> What I like to confirm is that if I keep max-reserve BW 76% then only 1% of
> BW will be used for LLQ?
>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:39 AM, ALL From_NJ <all.from.nj_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > If you have configured more bandwidth than what is avail, you will see
> the
> > error message telling you that you do not have enough.  You can use the
> > max-reserv command to alter what is available for your configuration.
> >
> > The link:
> >
> >
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/qos/command/reference/qos_m1.html#wp1039174
> >
> > By default you can only configure up to 75% of the bandwidth.  Use this
> > command when you want to configure more.  In your example, 24% would
> still
> > be available for class-default, aka ... unnamed traffic that does not
> match
> > your class-maps.
> >
> > The percent command will be a percentage of the available bandwidth.  The
> > above link can also be used for looking up these commands as well.
> >
> > IMO, the percentage commands are very good when you are offering a
> service
> > to another or when you want to standardize a QoS config.
> >
> > For example, network management traffic will always get at least 5% of
> the
> > bandwidth or biz traffic will always get 40% of bandwidth etc ...
> >
> > Some service providers might offer different service levels at different
> > prices.  An example of these might look like:
> >
> > VoIP always get 25%
> > Net Management always gets 5%
> > Ip Prec 3 might always get 30%
> > IP Prec 4 .... gets 15%
> > etc ...
> >
> > If you are a service provider, you can apply these configs to any link
> and
> > maintain the same service levels regardless of the actual bandwidth of
> the
> > link.  Voip will still always get 25% whether it is on a T1 or T3 ...
> >
> > Does this make sense?  I hope my examples are clear (many times I confuse
> > myself :-))
> >
> > HTH,
> >
> > Andrew Lee Lissitz
> > .
> >   On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:18 AM, S Malik <ccie.09_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>  ALL,
> >>
> >> if I have three classes of traffic each with 25% of minimum BW and 4th
> >> class
> >> of traffic with priority percent 25 then all I need for the
> service-policy
> >> command  to go through under interface is "max-reserve bw 76%".
> >>
> >> My question is that in this case only 1% of BW will be allocated to the
> >> traffic which is configured for LLQ?
> >>
> >>
> >> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________________________________
> >> Subscription information may be found at:
> >> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Andrew Lee Lissitz
> > all.from.nj_at_gmail.com
>
>
> 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