Re: LLQ

From: Ahmed Elhoussiny <aelhoussiny_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2009 20:20:58 +0200

Just adding that
in IOS : LLQ police to the configured percentage by default.
in IOS XR: LLQ will not police unless you use policing commands....which is
a must as not to starve the whole interface BW

On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:19 PM, Ahmed Elhoussiny <aelhoussiny_at_gmail.com>wrote:

> Dear all,
> if LLQ is used for VOIP, it will get dropped/policed in case
> the traffic exceeds the LLQ size.
> And this in case there is congestion and same if there is no congestion.`
> LLQ got nothin to do with congestion, this is based on IOS & IOS XR
> features & also my testing while designing QOS for my Mobile operator.
>
> In some references you may find LLQ congestion aware....but this didn't
> successfully being implemented till now...
>
> WHY ?
> simply imagine u have an LLQ class with 1 M , and no interface BW
> congestion.
> VOIP traffic increased to reach 2 M, and no drops cuz of no congestion due
> to not used BW on other classes...
> SO what if the traffic in other queues increased, and reached its 100 %,
> now the LLQ will decrease to reach 1 M, and all VOIP calls will get some
> packets dropped which will affect most of VOIP calls...
>
> Hope this might help
>
> Thanks & B.regards
> Ahmed Elhoussiny,2x CCIE# 21988 (R&S-SP)
> Network Consultant & Cisco Academy Instructor
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Tony Varriale <tvarriale_at_flamboyaninc.com>wrote:
>
>> I thought the priority queue won't use the general bucket when it's over
>> its
>> defined number? Hence, all packets will get dropped.
>>
>> tv
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
>> Narbik Kocharians
>> Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 10:20 AM
>> To: Wouter Prins
>> Cc: jack daniels; Cisco certification
>> Subject: Re: LLQ
>>
>> If you like the voice traffic to get 1M and 1M ONLY, then, provide LLQ and
>> Police that traffic at the same time. Very common.
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:10 AM, Wouter Prins <wp_at_null0.nl> wrote:
>>
>> > Hello Jack,
>> >
>> > What do you think would happen to the other traffic if the voice traffic
>> > was
>> > allowed to burst to 2M in a LLQ?
>> >
>> > Depending on whether the interface is congested or not, the traffic
>> would
>> > be
>> > dropped if it exceeds the bw you specify in the priority command. It's
>> sort
>> > of a conditional policer. The traffic will not end up in the default
>> class.
>> >
>> > 2009/12/8 jack daniels <jckdaniels12_at_gmail.com>
>> >
>> > > Hi guys,
>> > >
>> > > Please help me with the understanding of LLQ -
>> > >
>> > > If I have a link of 2 MB
>> > >
>> > > and I reserve 1 MB for VOICE ( LLQ) the if voice exceeds 1 MB will it
>> be
>> > > droppped or be sent in default class.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Wouter Prins
>> > wp_at_null0.nl
>> > CCIE #25628
>> >
>> >
>> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________________________________
>> > Subscription information may be found at:
>> > http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Narbik Kocharians
>> CCSI#30832, CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security)
>> www.MicronicsTraining.com
>> Sr. Technical Instructor
>> YES! We take Cisco Learning Credits!
>> Training And Remote Racks available
>>
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>

-- 
Thanks & B.regards
Ahmed Elhoussiny,2x CCIE# 21988 (R&S-SP)
Network Consultant & Cisco Academy Instructor
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Tue Dec 08 2009 - 20:20:58 ART

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sat Jan 02 2010 - 11:11:07 ART