Re: MQC class-default

Hi,

The behavior is different for CBWFQ and HQF to be accurate. CBWFQ is
merely a WFQ extension and therefore all unclassified traffic is
serviced using WFQ strategy, unless you assign an explicit weight to
class-default. Notice that this behavior may seriously starve the
"class-default" traffic, as all user-defined classes have
significantly better weights compared to WFQ dynamic weights. You may
read more at:

http://blog.ine.com/2008/08/17/insights-on-cbwfq/

As for HQF, it uses some round-robin (min-max type) based scheduling,
which cisco never documented anywhere. By default, all unclassified
flows are assigned to a single queue with 1% bandwidth reservation
enforced by the algorithm. This prevents the starvation problem found
in CBWFQ. Not to mention performance optimizations in HQF compared to
CBWFQ.

HTH,

-- 
Petr Lapukhov, petr_at_INE.com
CCIE #16379 (R&S/Security/SP/Voice)
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.INE.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987
Outside US: 775-826-4344
2010/4/29 Bit Gossip <bit.gossip_at_chello.nl>:
> Experts,
> the below quote from DocCD MQC class-default:
> "If no default class is configured, then by default the traffic that
> does not match any of the configured classes is flow classified and
> given best-effort treatment."
>
> 1) what does it mean: it is flow classified?
> Maybe that within the class-default itself WFQ is used to fair treat all
> flows in the class
> 2) what does it mean best-effort in this context? that is served only
> after all CBFQ are service?
> Thanks,
> Bit
>
>
> 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