Re: LLQ- help

When configuring LLQ, you can also configure burst that will allow you to
accommodate temporary bursts of traffic, this burst is calculated over 200
ms and the configured bandwidth, just do a "?" after the configured
bandwidth.

As far as Queueing in LLQ, can you adjust the depth of the queue? I think
this is what he was referring to.

On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 6:13 PM, Marko Milivojevic <markom_at_ipexpert.com>wrote:

> Well, no. LLQ is decidedly not the same as the Priority Queue. It's a
> conditionally policed near-realtime queue, but that's about the only
> similarity it has with the priority queue.
>
> When TX ring signals no congestion, there's no LLQ, hence the whole
> 30-seconds only thing is hard to digest, if you indeed meant LLQ in
> your earlier message. Furthermore, what does burst have anything to do
> with this? :-)
>
> Now the idea it's not a queue at all is interesting one. I suppose you
> could think of it that way, but I'm afraid it's still a queue. Same
> way the priority lane for 1st class passengers is a queue, yet it's
> almost always empty because packets are processed first.
>
> --
> Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
> Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
>
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 6:01 PM, Paul Negron <negron.paul_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > ???????
> >
> > LLQ has a so called" Priority Q" right?
> >
> > There is a default burst rateb&right?
> >
> > " The default burst value, which is computed as 200 milliseconds of
> traffic
> > at the configured bandwidth rate, is used when the burst argument is NOT
> > specified. The range of the burst is from 32 to 2000000 bytes."
> >
> > I am disagreeing with the point that if the other classes are not using
> the
> > bandwidthb&.that the priority Q can use as much it wanted. I am even
> debating
> > that the priority Q is a QUEUE at all!!!!
> >
> > so nowb& WHat do you mean by , How does this relate to LLQ?
> >
> > Not argumentative! You got me curious about your comment/question.
> >
> > Paul
> >
> > Paul Negron
> > CCIE# 14856
> > negron.paul_at_gmail.com
> > 303-725-8162
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 17, 2012, at 8:43 PM, Marko Milivojevic <markom_at_ipexpert.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > How does this relate to LLQ? :-)
> >
> > --
> > Marko Milivojevic - CCIE #18427 (SP R&S)
> > Senior CCIE Instructor - IPexpert
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 5:35 PM, Paul Negron <negron.paul_at_gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > It depends on what code you are talking about. The Priority Q used to
> > default
> > to 30 ms burst rate which would allow to ONLY burst to 30 ms of traffic
> > above
> > the Priority rate. It's really not a Queue. I tested this with real Voice
> > and
> > Video traffic a while back and it limited the calls/traffic with NO
> other
> > traffic being used by other classes. The default policer in the Priority
> Q
> > would default to a very very low burst rate and drop traffic even when
> the
> > pipe was not filled.
> >
> >
> > Paul Negron
> > CCIE# 14856
> > negron.paul_at_gmail.com
> >
> >
> >
> > On Dec 17, 2012, at 9:15 AM, dia.aliou_at_gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > As Carlos said, with only "priority percent 10", 10 percent of the
> > bandwidth is reserved for this class, however if there is available
> > bandwidth and the there is no congestion this class could use more than
> > 10%. To enforce the reserved bandwidth to 10% you need to explicitly
> police
> > the traffic.
> >
> >
> > On 16 December 2012 13:26, Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar> wrote:
> >
> > Janesh,
> > implicit policing by the "priority" QPF command is done only when
> > congestion is present and queueing control "engaged".
> >
> > If you want to restrict the stream at all times, explicit policing with
> > "police" is needed.
> >
> > -Carlos
> >
> > janesh gs @ 16/12/2012 09:55 -0300 dixit:
> >
> > Hello there,
> >
> >
> > Could someone please explain the pros/cons of the following 2
> > configuration options in a single policy-map scenario.
> > Also where we will use one over the other in real life
> >
> > Option 1
> > --------------
> > policy-map BLAH
> > class BLAH
> > priority percent 10
> > police cir percent 10
> >
> >
> > Option 2
> > --------------
> > policy-map BLAH
> > class BLAH
> > priority percent 10
> >
> > All along I have been sticking to Option 2.
> >
> > Many thanks,
> > Janesh
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > ______________________________**______________________________**
> > ___________
> > Subscription information may be found at:
> >
> > http://www.groupstudy.com/**list/CCIELab.html<
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/
> > CCIELab.html>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar> LW7 EQI Argentina
> >
> >
> >
> > Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
> >
> > ______________________________**______________________________**
> > ___________
> > Subscription information may be found at: http://www.groupstudy.com/**
> > list/CCIELab.html <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
> >
> >
> >
> > 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

-- 
*Narbik Kocharians
*CCSI#30832, CCIE# 12410 (R&S, SP, Security)
*www.MicronicsTraining.com* <http://www.micronicstraining.com/>
Sr. Technical Instructor
YES! We take Cisco Learning Credits!
A Cisco Learning Partner
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net