01-18-2006 06:35 AM - edited 03-03-2019 01:29 AM
Two questions For VOIP traffic,
Q.1. should the payload and signalling be assigned the same COS ?? to avoid losing Signalling traffic.
Q.2. flash upgrades to the phone sets are tftp. Should this traffic be assigned COS=0 or the same cos as the signalling traffic ? Phone flash gets corrupted if some of these packets are lost ?
thanks for your help,
01-18-2006 07:08 AM
Hello,
best practice puts signaling into another class than voip "payload" as you named it.
The reason is that the qos requirements are different. Signaling needs guaranteed bandwidth, voip needs low delay and guaranteed bandwidth.
TFTP can be placed into signaling class or in a separate class.
An example config could look like this:
ip cef
class-map match-any VoIP
match ip dscp ef cs5
match protocol rtp audio
class-map match-any VoIPsignal
match ip dscp cs3
class-map match-all TFTP
match protocol tftp
policy-map VoIPprio
class VoIP
priority percent 10
class VoIPsignal
bandwidth remaining percent 5
class TFTP
bandwidth remaining percent 5
class class-default
fair-queue
random-detect
interface Serial0
ip address ...
service-policy output VoIPprio
You would have to adjust the bandwith ratios for your needs and the interface naming to your environment.
The policy will give 10% of the link to voip traffic with lowest possible delay, 5% of the rest for voip signaling, 5% to TFTP and the rest for the other data present.
Hope this helps
01-19-2006 09:55 AM
Thanks for the reply. I have 100Mb ethernet link between 6509s gig ports at two sites.
6509gig5/2------100mb trunk-----6509gig6/1
Q.1. Wondering if 'fair-queue / random-detect' will work on this link for default-class traffic ?? or
Q.2. should I set up COS-Queueing combination like other LAN traffic.
01-19-2006 12:58 PM
Hi,
The use of fair-queue is recommended because it will protect that class from a single greedy flow that is trying to hog the queue..
It also comes in handy if you are experiencing a DOS attack as it will restrict how much damage it can do.
Hope that helps - pls rate the post if it does.
Paresh
01-19-2006 03:40 PM
Hello,
"fair-queue" will always work and has some advantages as described by Paresh. WRED or "random-detect" should be used, if the majority of traffic is TCP. Usually this is the case and therefore I would recommend it as well.
Regarding CoS values and queueing for them:
The first question is, whether you have traffic marked with IP precedence/DSCP values other than default. In case you do not have this in your network, there is no need to modify queueing.
In case you need to prioritize some traffic (like VoIP, SAP, Citrix, etc.) compared to other traffic you should use IP precedence or DSCP values to mark it into different classes and adjust queueing according to the values in use.
Hope this helps! Please rate all posts.
Regards, Martin
01-20-2006 05:47 AM
Thanks for the reply Martin and Paresh.
I do have voip traffic marked with cos=5, dscp=46 queued to priorityQ. The link in question is between two 6509s gig-ports. 6509 has PFC3. Im not sure if fair-queueing/wred is supported by 6509-PFC3 on ethernet gig trunk ports??
01-20-2006 05:55 AM
Actually, I don't believe you have the option of using fair-queue on the 6509s....but I could be wrong.
Paresh
01-20-2006 07:09 AM
Could you please elaborate why you say that. Fair-q, and random-detect are valid options in the config command of policy-map under class-map. though 6509-PFC3 QOS chapter doesnot mention FairQ.
01-20-2006 02:22 PM
That's the reason I said that...I have not played with a PFC3 personally and there was no mention of 'fair-queue' in the command reference.
But if it is there, then I'm sure you should be able to use it.
Hope that helps - pls rate the post if it does.
Paresh
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide