05-19-2015 05:32 PM - edited 03-05-2019 01:30 AM
I'm working on a traditional MPLS network, which is fully meshed, with lets say 25 spoke sites at 1 T1 Mbps each going to a Hub datacenter running at 50 Mbps. Consider an RDP app running on Hub server to clients at spoke sites. Each site has 20 PC's that could each consume anywhere from 250Mbps-1000Mbps of spike-y bandwidth to pull down the RDP app. This equates to a total of 5-20 Mbps total possible for each site, well over the T1 allocated for them.
How do I configure QoS such that:
1. I limit the total BW consumption at each site to 50% max for RDP?
2. prevent RDP from clobbering itself over the allocated 1/2 T1 (750 Mbps) among the 20 PC's at each site?
I think I know the answer to number 2! :) buy more bandwidth. Or throttle RDP such that it doesn't use as much bandwidth pre client session - done on the RDP server itself. If I'm wrong, let me know.
Regarding number 1, it seems like since I have no PVC's to each site, my output QoS policy on the Hub site for RDP is not possible. For example, I cannot do a priority queue with a certain bandwidth percent because this will be from the total 50 Mbps. So if I constrained the Hub to 50% of 50 Mbps, it would simply limit overall RDP to all sites, still allowing one site to try to pull down too much RDP. On the other hand, If I constrained RDP on the Hub circuit to 750 Kbps, it would constrain this for all sites and not effectively use the 50 Mbps bandwidth. Any ideas on this?
thx in advance,
Will
Solved! Go to Solution.
05-20-2015 04:51 AM
Hi,
I'm afraid if you want to limit RDP traffic output on the hub site per each spoke site, you would need to configure multiple RDP queues (per each remote site) on the hub router.
I.e., you would need to match destination IP addresses additionally to the RDP ports for each queue.
Plus you would need to configure a policer for each queue dropping traffic exceeding the limit (750 kbps you mentioned).
Which would be pretty annoying for 25 spoke sites :-(
Best regards,
Milan
05-20-2015 05:23 AM
Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
One method to address your issue, if your device support CBWFQ, you define one class for each branch and shape for the branch's bandwidth. Each branch class also invokes a child policy, where you manage the traffic as you desire.
05-20-2015 04:51 AM
Hi,
I'm afraid if you want to limit RDP traffic output on the hub site per each spoke site, you would need to configure multiple RDP queues (per each remote site) on the hub router.
I.e., you would need to match destination IP addresses additionally to the RDP ports for each queue.
Plus you would need to configure a policer for each queue dropping traffic exceeding the limit (750 kbps you mentioned).
Which would be pretty annoying for 25 spoke sites :-(
Best regards,
Milan
05-20-2015 08:30 AM
thx guys, I was afraid of those answers. I actually have 52 sites, but kept it simple for the questions. so can I even configure that many classes for each site? would I do something like this:
class-map site1
...
class-map siteN ! can I configure 50 of these? might even need 3 per site for other traffic.
policy-map SiteQoS
class-map siteN ! will the policy-map hold this many class-maps?
interface Ethernet1
service-policy output SiteQos
Many thx for the initial respsones!
Will
05-20-2015 09:04 AM
Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
52 shouldn't be an issue. I recall even the earliest CBWFQ supported 64 classes. Next version I recall supported 256 classes.
Unclear why you would need 3 per site. In fact, that might defeat the whole purpose, which is to manage the aggregate bandwidth to the branch site.
05-20-2015 12:43 PM
thx joseph, I would need an overriding policer for each T1 site. and within that I have 2-3 classes of other traffic in addition to RDP. so I would probably have to define those classes for each site
SITE1_CL1 (Voip), SITE1_CL2 (RDP), SITE1_CL3 (Web), default
as an example. so that's where I was getting the 3 x 50 sites or about 150 classes.
Anyone seen any CPU constraints when running such a configuration with so many classes? will run for now on a 6509 with a VS-S720-10G
05-20-2015 05:26 PM
Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
The good news, is you often use the same subordinate/child policy across all your sites, e.g.:
policy-map parent
class site1
shape average 1500000
service-policy child
class site2
shape average 1500000
service-policy child
class siteN
shape average 1500000
service-policy child
policy-map child
class voip
priority percent 30
class rdp
bandwidth remaining percent 50
class web
bandwidth remaining percent 25
class class-default
bandwidth remaining percent 25
The bad news is, typical 6500s don't support egress CBWFQ (unless you have something like a FlexWAN card).
05-20-2015 05:23 AM
Disclaimer
The Author of this posting offers the information contained within this posting without consideration and with the reader's understanding that there's no implied or expressed suitability or fitness for any purpose. Information provided is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as rendering professional advice of any kind. Usage of this posting's information is solely at reader's own risk.
Liability Disclaimer
In no event shall Author be liable for any damages whatsoever (including, without limitation, damages for loss of use, data or profit) arising out of the use or inability to use the posting's information even if Author has been advised of the possibility of such damage.
Posting
One method to address your issue, if your device support CBWFQ, you define one class for each branch and shape for the branch's bandwidth. Each branch class also invokes a child policy, where you manage the traffic as you desire.
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