From: Jared Scrivener (jscrivener@ipexpert.com)
Date: Wed Feb 18 2009 - 14:31:07 ARST
It depends on the specifics of the question.
Using DSCP based random-detection you would affect the other QOS types
differently (if they passed through your network) than if you used IP Prec
based.
I.E. AF31 traffic would be differentiated from CS3 traffic in terms of the
drop probabilities if it was to pass through your network using DSCP based
WRED, but it wouldn't using IP Prec based WRED.
With respect to the only data flow you've shown, what you've done would work
identically in both methods.
Cheers,
Jared Scrivener CCIE3 #16983 (R&S, Security, SP), CISSP
Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc
Telephone: +1.810.326.1444
Fax: +1.810.454.0130
Mailto: jscrivener@ipexpert.com
-----Original Message-----
From: nobody@groupstudy.com [mailto:nobody@groupstudy.com] On Behalf Of
GAURAV MADAN
Sent: Wednesday, 18 February 2009 11:12 AM
To: Cisco certification
Subject: random-detect query
Hi All
I did one ques wrong on random-detect funda .. wondering if my thinking is
wrong or my sol can be treated as correct ?
Q : All "critical" traffic should be randomly dropped before cogestion
occurs
I understand that when it says "critical" ; meaning is --> random-detect
prec based ....
i should have done :
(config-pmap-c)#random-detect precedence 5 60 90 5
I dont know what was going in my mind .. i did random-detect dscp based
and matched on cs5 .
Rack1R4(config-pmap)#do sh policy-map
Policy Map RANDOM
Class class-default
packet-based wred, exponential weight 9
dscp min-threshold max-threshold mark-probablity
----------------------------------------------------------
cs5 (40) 60 90 1/5
default (0) - - 1/10
Again cs5 : dscp 101000
was i really wrong ?
Gaurav Madan
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Mar 01 2009 - 09:44:11 ARST