RE: Policy map question

Yes..I tried without queue-limit..No difference.( it assigns default size 64)
And Yes..there is no matches on the default-class with Option #2.. see below

sh policy-map interface Gi0/3.1621
GigabitEthernet0/3.1621

  Service-policy output: parent-E2E

    Class-map: class-default (match-any)
      22249 packets, 33676610 bytes
      30 second offered rate 8779000 bps, drop rate 650000 bps
      Match: any
      Traffic Shaping
           Target/Average Byte Sustain Excess Interval Increment
             Rate Limit bits/int bits/int (ms) (bytes)
         10000000/10000000 62500 250000 250000 25 31250

        Adapt Queue Packets Bytes Packets Bytes Shaping
        Active Depth Delayed Delayed Active
        - 490 20300 30725824 19699 29824286 yes

      Service-policy : child-E2E

        Class-map: E2E (match-all)
          22243 packets, 33675902 bytes
          30 second offered rate 8778000 bps, drop rate 650000 bps
          Match: ip dscp af11 (10)
          Queueing
            Output Queue: Conversation 266
            Bandwidth 50 (%)
            Bandwidth 5000 (kbps)Max Threshold 500 (packets)
            (pkts matched/bytes matched) 21651/32779614
        (depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 492/1567/0

        Class-map: class-default (match-all)
          0 packets, 0 bytes
          30 second offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
          Match: any
          Queueing
            Output Queue: Conversation 271
            Bandwidth 50 (%)
            Bandwidth 5000 (kbps)Max Threshold 64 (packets)
            (pkts matched/bytes matched) 0/0
        (depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: robclav_at_gmail.com [mailto:robclav_at_gmail.com]
>Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 3:28 PM
>To: BALAKRISHNAN Balaji; Cisco certification
>Subject: Re: Policy map question
>
>Hi,
>I believe Queue limit doesn't burst , Did you try without it?
>Do you have matches at default-class using the second option?
>Hth,
>Robclav
>Enviado desde mi BlackBerry(r) de Vodafone
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: BALAKRISHNAN Balaji <Balaji.BALAKRISHNAN_at_swift.com>
>Sender: nobody_at_groupstudy.com
>Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 20:03:29
>To: ccielab_at_groupstudy.com<ccielab_at_groupstudy.com>
>Reply-To: BALAKRISHNAN Balaji <Balaji.BALAKRISHNAN_at_swift.com>
>Subject: Policy map question
>
>All,
>
>I have a policy map question and want know what is the difference in the QOS
>flow behavior between the two child policy definition
>
>Policy-map parent-E2E
>Class class-default
>Shape average 10000000
>Service policy child-E2E
>
>
>#1
>Policy-map child-E2E
>Class class-default
>Bandwidth percent 100
>
>#2
>
>Policy-map child-E2E
>Class E2E
>Bandwidth percent 50
>queue-limit 500
>Class class-default
>Bandwidth percent 50
>
>
>What is the difference in the QOS behavior if I use #2 child policy instead of
>#1 when the traffic peaks to 10Mbps but all matches the class E2E. I
>thought the behavior would be same because even though option #2 has only 50%
>in E2E class , it would borrow the bandwidth from the default-class when
>traffic needs more. But what is noticed is that when I use option #1, there
>are no queue-drops but with option #2, I see huge queue drops ?? why ??
>
>
>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 Thu Sep 22 2011 - 21:46:31 ART