@Georg Pauwen I'm presuming you're showing usage of a hierarchical policy in case there's an overall bandwidth sub-limit on the gig inteface's gig bandwidth, correct? (NB: to OP, if there's no bandwidth sub-limit, you don't need parent and child policies.)
"Each Vlan gets 100MB"
Each VLAN has "priority 102400", which I recall is Kbps, so it's, as noted, 102.4 Mbps, but "shape average 1024000" I recall (?) that numeric is in bps, or it's 1 Mbps.
Some of how to structure a CBWFQ policy is "personal taste", but I would not recommend using priority (LLQ) classes, principally because LLQ is used for really, really time sensitive traffic, like VoIP, so, personally, I keep it in reserve for just that purpose. Also those priority classes all get directed to just one egress FIFO queue, which re-creates the global FIFO egress issues when not using CBWFQ.
"priority 10240" might be replaced by (two lines) "bandwidth #" and "shape (or police) #". NB: priority or bandwidth and shape/police might only be used within an egress policy, but using "police #" can also be use for an ingress (or egress [w/o bandwidth, you cannot have different dequeuing ratios between classes]) policy.
Lastly, Georg's has FQ in a defined class-default (in the child policy), but perhaps a simple "drop" would be a better choice, so that any traffic w/o a defined class doesn't "leak" out.
