07-24-2006 12:01 AM - edited 03-03-2019 01:25 PM
Hello,
do you think this can work?
!
class-map match-all CUSTOMER1
match access-group name cust1
class-map match-all CUSTOMER2
match access-group name cust2
class-map match-any CUSTOMER3
match access-group name cust3
class-map match-any CUSTOMER4
match access-group name cust4
!
!
policy-map Shaping
class CUSTOMER1
shape average 128000
class CUSTOMER2
shape average 192000
class CUSTOMER3
shape average 256000
class CUSTOMER4
shape average 512000
class class-deafult
!
!
policy-map LMQOS
class voice
set ip dscp ef
class High
set ip dscp af32
bandwidth 2048
service-policy Shaping
class Low
set ip dscp af31
bandwidth 2048
service-policy Shaping
class best-effort
set ip dscp default
service-policy Shaping
!
ip access-list extended cust1
permit ip 1.1.1.0 0.0.0.255 10.10.10.0 0.0.0.255
!
ip access-list extended cust2
permit ip 2.2.2.0 0.0.0.255 10.10.10.0 0.0.0.255
!
ip access-list extended cust3
permit ip 3.3.3.0 0.0.0.255 10.10.10.0 0.0.0.255
!
ip access-list extended cust4
permit ip 4.4.4/0 0.0.0.255 10.10.10.0 0.0.0.255
!
The goal is to shape specific traffic in each class and also perform queing.
Or is there any better (working) way to achieve this?
Thanks
peter
Solved! Go to Solution.
07-25-2006 09:17 AM
I can understand that concern. The problem, though, is when you apply a 128k shaper to the 3 different classes of service you've specified, they will operate independantly. So in theory, you'll be shaping at 384k to that destination.
The way i've proposed actually will attempt to preserve the traffic classes. A single LLQ will be made from all different LLQ classes in order to preserve that traffic (up to line rate, or configured "priority" values). Also, when the interface is under congestion, it will begin dequeueing at a lower rate from the shaping queues, but the shaping queues will still give priority to the classes you've put a bandwidth guarantee on.
07-24-2006 05:19 AM
It should work but it looks like you still have some classes to define; voice, high, low and best-effort
-mike pls rate if helpful
07-24-2006 08:57 AM
From the look of your config, it looks like you've got a "CIR" on a per-location basis, so you want to use shaping to not exceed that value. You also want to do QoS to preserve different classes on a per-site basis. If so, you're close, but you applied the policy-maps backwards. I think this is what you were going for:
policy-map Shaping
class CUSTOMER1
shape average 128000
service-policy LMQOS
class CUSTOMER2
shape average 192000
service-policy LMQOS
class CUSTOMER3
shape average 256000
service-policy LMQOS
class CUSTOMER4
shape average 512000
service-policy LMQOS
!
!
policy-map LMQOS
class voice
set ip dscp ef
priority percent 20
class High
set ip dscp af32
bandwidth percent 15
class Low
set ip dscp af31
bandwidth percent 10
class best-effort
set ip dscp default
!
Since we're applying the same policy to different speed classes, I went ahead and modified your QOS to guarantee based on percentage, rather than absolute values. This way you wont need independant per-site policy-maps.
And, much like the other comment in this thread, you may want to guarantee bandwidth for voice, and create a LLQ by using the "priority" command under voice. I went ahead and modified your config to contain this.
07-25-2006 06:44 AM
Thanks for reply. I applied policy-map backward because I want first sort the packets in a correct order and then shape this flow. That means packets with highest priority will not be dropped.
07-25-2006 09:17 AM
I can understand that concern. The problem, though, is when you apply a 128k shaper to the 3 different classes of service you've specified, they will operate independantly. So in theory, you'll be shaping at 384k to that destination.
The way i've proposed actually will attempt to preserve the traffic classes. A single LLQ will be made from all different LLQ classes in order to preserve that traffic (up to line rate, or configured "priority" values). Also, when the interface is under congestion, it will begin dequeueing at a lower rate from the shaping queues, but the shaping queues will still give priority to the classes you've put a bandwidth guarantee on.
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