QOS on 9600 switches

[carl_townshend]

Hi All

We have tried to apply a QOS policy on our new 9600 switches, it has come up with an error

"% Queuing actions supported only with dscp/cos/qos-group/precedence
based classification!!!"

Our class map matches ef and also an access list.

Is this not supported? can we only match on packet markings now?

How would I get around this, mark the traffic first then match it? the only issue I see would mean I have to add the service policy input to all the ports on the switch so I can match and mark it?

Many thanks 

Carl

[balaji.bandi]

Most of the IOS XE uses the same syntax format, are you migrating from old to new or is this new policy creating. - since we do not see your configuration, i am trying to help with the below suggested  common QoS errors  and troubleshooting :

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/support/docs/switches/catalyst-3850-series-switches/200729-Common-QoS-error-messages-on-Catalyst-38.html#anc9

[cmarva]

that's what i ended up doing on 9500s. I was able to find a document on this way back when, and yeah, that's what it came down to, classify and mark on ingress, shape and police on egress. 

i also found out that you can't attach output service policies to sub interfaces either.

[Joseph W. Doherty]

Remember, on switches, QoS is generally bound to hardware QoS support, so this often makes for a much more restricted QoS implementation as compared to a router.

Perhaps, with Cisco trying to use the same MQC across multiple platforms, QoS feature support differences might be more frustrating.  At least on the "older" switches, with their often "unique" QoS commands, it was clear (compared to a routers or other switches), we're not in Kansas anymore.

[Joseph W. Doherty]

Oh, I forgot to mention, if you're stuck just relying on IP ToS markings, remember a) DSCP is a "suggestion" and b) DSCP only uses half of the ToS values, the others (I recall) were set aside for "private" usage.