RE: QOS Question Asking

Is this a mock-up lab? You would need to clear the overall meaning of the
task with the vendor or look up in the answer key, there might be more to do
from other tasks since your config shows a little more than necessary in
configuration. Why did you choose threshold 1 vs 100% load threshold 3 for
CoS 0 and 5?

One thing to notice in sharing mode queues is that priority queue is #1, not
#4. So the weights should be changed accordingly. Otherwise the
configuration is straightforward and there are good examples, examples are
in the command reference (the fastest way to get there is by typing
"srr-queue bandwidth shape" in a good search engine of your choice).

Cheers,

Adel Abouchaev, CCIE# 12037, CISSP, MCSE

Technical Support Engineer
Netmasterclass LLC, Cisco Learning Partner
RFC821: adel_at_netmasterclass.net
E.164: +18886772669
HTTP: www.netmasterclass.net

-----Original Message-----
From: nobody_at_groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody_at_groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
davidytk_at_netvigator.com
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 1:04 AM
Cc: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com
Subject: QOS Question Asking

Hi All
 
I have a question about QOS on srr-queue.
 
Configure QoS on HQ Switch and assign COS 5 to Priority Queue, COS 3,6,7 in
Queue 2, COS 1 2,4 in Queue 3, COS0 in Queue 4.

Also configure following bandwidth restrictions
Queue Bandwidth
1 33%
2 20%
3 40%
20% should be exclusively for Queue 1 which is priority queue.
This should be configured on gig1/0/1
 
I configured the following
 
srr-queue output cos-map queue 1 thershold 1 5
srr-queue output cos-map queue 2 thershold 3 3 6 7
srr-queue output cos-map queue 3 thershold 3 1 2 4
srr-queue output cos-map queue 4 thershold 1 0
 
 
int f1/0/1
 queue-set 1
 priority-queue out
 srr-queue bandwidth share 33 40 20 7 (don't know configure correct)
 srr-queue bandwidth shape 5 0 0 0 (assign 20% for queue 1 for priority,
don't know configure correct?)
 
Please help if there is any configuration missing or wrong
 
David

Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Mon Mar 15 2010 - 12:02:01 ART