Each remote site has a Cisco 1861 router (latest IOS) with it's fa0/0 interface connected to an ISP supplied DSL router that is doing all the authentication for me and bridging. No QoS of any kind on the ISP router.
The DSL has an 800kbps upload limit.
Here is my question.
I'm running VOIP across all these tunnels and want to implement QoS. I can run AutoQoS on the internet facing fa0/0 interface but it would seem to me to be pointless as the interface is running at 100Mbps and the DSL is only 800kbps. The calculations AutoQoS would make would be based on the interface speed, not the DSL
My thought would be to use traffic shaping on the default-class to limit it to actual bandwidth of the ADSL (or should I make it less ?) for non VOIP traffic.
class-map match-any AutoQoS-VoIP-RTP-Trust match ip dscp ef
class-map match-any AutoQoS-VoIP-Control-Trust match ip dscp cs3 match ip dscp af31
policy-map AutoQoS-Policy-Trust class AutoQoS-VoIP-RTP-Trust priority percent 70 class AutoQoS-VoIP-Control-Trust bandwidth percent 5 class class-default fair-queue shape average 800000 << Shape class-default to 800kbps >>
interface FastEthernet0/0 description Outside ip address x.x.x.x 255.255.255.248 ip nat outside ip virtual-reassembly in zone-member security out-zone duplex auto speed auto auto qos voip trust service-policy output AutoQoS-Policy-Trust
I feel you are better off with allocating the remaning bandwidth the class-default, also make sure that you define the exact available bandwidth on the wan interface using bandwidth command. If you dont use this command to define and leave it as it then you will end up reserving 70% of available bandwidth as mentioned on the interface by default which is 100Mbps in your case. Change the bandwidth statement under the interface first and also make sure that you allocate only 75% of the available bandwidth to the QoS clasess since the rest is required for other keepalives/routing updates etc., I think you are bettter off with this allocation or else you need to make sure that you reserve 100% bandwidth on the interface and also you need to make sure that you define a class for routing and reserve 3 to 5 % of the total bandwidth for that class.
I think it would be better for you to use nested policy-maps.
The first policy-map should be a shaper that shapes all traffic to 800 kbps. This policy-map should have only one class, class-default, the shaper configured under that class and the second policy applied to it.
The second policy-map is the queueing policy which may look like your policy AutoQos-Policy-Trust but without the shaper in class-default. Of course it is essential to define the bandwidth under the interface in order for the percent commands to apply to the right value.