From: jfaure@sztele.com
Date: Tue Oct 19 2004 - 06:02:15 GMT-3
Brian:
Firstly, thank you very much for your help... Yesterday, after reviewing
all the doc relating to QoS i thought i had seen a "configuration task
list" for CBWFQ for FR, that did not specify some form of shapping to do
this, but it was not exactly true... There was a task list to configure LLQ
for Frame Relay where they did not spoke about shapping explicitly, but if
you see the config examples at the end of the chapter, you can deduce that
it is applied...
policy-map mypolicy
class voice
priority 16
class immediate-data
bandwidth 32
random-detect
interface Serial1/0.1 point-to-point
frame-relay interface-dlci 100
class fragment
!
map-class frame-relay fragment
frame-relay cir 64000
frame-relay mincir 64000
frame-relay bc 640
frame-relay fragment 50
service-policy output mypolicy
For this particular case that you can see at
http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios122/122cgcr/fqos_c/fqcprt2/qcfwfq.htm#1018450
, the configuration of the physical interace s1/0 is not displayed, then i
can not see if this physical interface has "frame-relay trafffic-shapping"
on it, but i think it must be there, isn't it?
Then, we can say that with CBWFQ or LLQ for Frame Relay environments, some
form of shapping ("legacy FRTS" as in this example, or shapping with MQC as
you mentioned previously) is totally required, is not it? Or am i missing
anything?
Thank you very much for your help and Best Regards
Juan
"Brian McGahan"
<bmcgahan@internetworke Para: <jfaure@sztele.com>, <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
xpert.com> cc:
Asunto: RE: Frame Relay CBWFQ config
18/10/2004 20:29
Juan,
When you are configuring FRTS through the MQC, the command
"frame-relay traffic-shaping" is not enabled on the interface. Instead,
the available bandwidth is determined by what the shape adaptive command
says like in the following example:
policy-map X
class class-default
shape average 64000 4000
shape adaptive 48000
!
map-class frame-relay FRTS
service-policy output X
!
interface Serial0/0
encapsulation frame-relay
frame-relay class FRTS
Rack2R4#show policy-map interface serial0/0
Serial0/0: DLCI 401 -
Service-policy output: X
Class-map: class-default (match-any)
0 packets, 0 bytes
5 minute offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
Match: any
Traffic Shaping
Target/Average Byte Sustain Excess Interval
Increment
Rate Limit bits/int bits/int (ms) (bytes)
64000/64000 1000 4000 4000 62 500
Adapt Queue Packets Bytes Packets Bytes Shaping
Active Depth Delayed Delayed Active
BECN 0 0 0 0 0 no
Rack2R4#show traffic-shape queue serial0/0
Traffic queued in shaping queue on Serial0/0
Traffic shape class: class-default
Queueing strategy: weighted fair
Queueing Stats: 0/1000/64/0 (size/max total/threshold/drops)
Conversations 0/0/16 (active/max active/max total)
Reserved Conversations 0/0 (allocated/max allocated)
Available Bandwidth 48 kilobits/sec
The "available bandwidth 48" shows that this value is bounded by the
shape adaptive command. This is analogous to the "frame-relay mincir"
value with legacy FRTS.
HTH,
Brian McGahan, CCIE #8593
bmcgahan@internetworkexpert.com
Internetwork Expert, Inc.
http://www.InternetworkExpert.com
Toll Free: 877-224-8987 x 705
Outside US: 775-826-4344 x 705
24/7 Support: http://forum.internetworkexpert.com
Live Chat: http://www.internetworkexpert.com/chat/
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf
Of
> jfaure@sztele.com
> Sent: Monday, October 18, 2004 12:45 PM
> To: ccielab@groupstudy.com
> Subject: Frame Relay CBWFQ config
>
> Hi Group:
>
> I have some doubt related how this QoS feature must be configured.
I've
> seen on the doc-cd that the bandwith allocation you can do with this
is
> related to the MINCIR of the frame relay link, however i've also seen
that
> FRTS is not required to configure Class based Weigh Fair Queue for
frame
> relay environments... then how the system is able to know the
available
> bandwith if you do not specify the cir & mincir on some way?
>
> Maybe the FRTS config is not in the examples for simplicity, but it
is
> desirable you configure it.. If you remember with RSVP & FR, the FRTS
is
> required, then why is it not required with CBWFQ?
>
> Anyone can clarify, please?
>
> Regards and thank you very much for your help
>
> Juan
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 06 2004 - 17:11:49 GMT-3