07-27-2012 06:22 AM - edited 03-04-2019 05:05 PM
Hi Experts
is it a good config the below for QOS on WAN edge to maintain the voice traffic and data ,when the congestion happend?pls ur comments
class-map match-any DATA
match ip dscp af21
class-map match-any CRITICAL-DATA
match dscp cs3 af31
class-map match-any VOICE
match dscp ef
class-map match-any SIGNALING
match dscp CS5
class-map match-any SCAVENGER
match ip dscp cs1 af11
policy-map WAN
class VOICE
priority percent 15
class SIGNALING
bandwidth percent 5
class CRITICAL-DATA
bandwidth percent 15
random-detect dscp-based
class DATA
bandwidth percent 25
random-detect dscp-based
class SCAVENGER
bandwidth percent 5
class class-default
bandwidth percent 10
random-detect
INT G0/3
desc 8 E1 to Southen area
bandwith 20000
service-policy output WAN
thanks
jamil
07-27-2012 06:47 AM
Hi Ibrahim,
generally, it looks ok, you have to run it n see if it needs to be further adjusted.
but since u just pre-assigned 75% of ur link's BW, you have 25% unassigned there, you could use bandwidth remaining command to define IF there is any bandwidth left, how should it be devided between classes. it is totally optional n up to u though
Hope it Helps,
Soroush.
07-27-2012 07:04 AM
Hi Soroush.
thanks for ur reply
in which class should i configure the bandwidth remaining?
07-27-2012 07:27 AM
when there is left over bandwidth, by default it will be devided between classes in a proportional manner. now if u want to override this default behaviour and assign more unused bandwidth to a certain class in case of congestion, you should config that command, it is totally up to you and the traffic vol. of each class.
here is a useful link for u:
plz Rate helpful posts.
HTH
Soroush.
07-27-2012 08:20 AM
Thank a lot of ur reply
can i have the two service policy (1) inbound and (1)outbound at the same WAN interface?if so what is the difference
thanks
07-27-2012 09:48 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
Can't really say without knowing your network application service requirements. What you have might work fine, make no difference or make things worse.
Generally, I recommend against using WRED, as its defaults often need tuning and on low bandwidth pipes, such as your E1, there's often few concurrent flows for it to work (well) against.
Also generally, I recommend avoiding, if possible, using FIFO queuing for multiple flows.
A generic good CBWFQ policy to start with, is:
policy-map WAN
class VOICE
priority percent 33
class class-default
fair-queue
If you really have needs to priorize/depriorize other traffic, and your router supports HQF, then something like:
policy-map WAN
class VOICE
priority percent 33
class PREFERENCE
bandwidth remaining percent 81
fair-queue
class SCAVENGER
bandwidth remaining percent 1
fair-queue
class class-default
bandwidth remaining percent 9
fair-queue
07-27-2012 11:27 AM
Hi Joseph
thanks for ur reply
can u post me a full config according my input , also pls note i have 8 E1 connected to gig interface
thanks
jamil
07-28-2012 04:35 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
Again, can't be specific without knowing much more about your service requirements.
However, using a gig interface with 8xE1 downstream, you should shape for that.
So something like. . .
INT G0/3
desc 8 E1 to Southen area
bandwith 16000
service-policy output WAN_Shape_16Mb
policy-map WAN_Shape_16Mb
class class-default
shape average 16000000
service-policy WAN
When doing VoIP, your Tc should be about 10 ms or less, if not adjust your Bc.
I might be mistaken, but I suspect many shapers don't account for L2 overhead, if not shape 5 to 15% slower.
Oh, and class-maps could be like:
class-map match-any PREFERENCE
match ip precedence 7 6 5
match ip precedence 4 3 2
class-map match-any VOICE
match dscp ef
class-map match-any SCAVENGER
match ip precedence 1
07-28-2012 06:45 AM
Hi Joseph
Kindly, can y explain the below:
class-map match-any PREFERENCE
match ip precedence 7 6 5
match ip precedence 4 3 2
why in the class default y shaped to 8E1s then y have applied policy-map WAN?
class class-default
shape average 16000000
service-policy WAN
pls can y post me the full recomended config includes the classes-map and policy map in order to past it in my router
thanks
Jamil
07-29-2012 03:17 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
Kindly, can y explain the below:class-map match-any PREFERENCE
match ip precedence 7 6 5
match ip precedence 4 3 2
This class catches all the traffic, that's not caught in other classes, that's to be treated better than best effort, i.e. given a preference over best effort and scavenger traffic.
why in the class default y shaped to 8E1s then y have applied policy-map WAN?class class-default
shape average 16000000
service-policy WAN
Because if you have a gig interface and 8E1 downstream, QoS on just gig interface would only engage when there's congestion at gig interace. This allows us to treat for congestion at the 8E1 bottleneck without having a QoS policy there.
pls can y post me the full recomended config includes the classes-map and policy map in order to past it in my router
I cannnot as I have insuffient information. First, as I've mentioned twice, don't know your service requirements. Second, don't know the platform nor it's installed IOS.
07-29-2012 11:17 AM
Hi Joseph
thanks for ur reply
class-map match-any PREFERENCE
match ip precedence 7 6 5
match ip precedence 4 3 2
1)why ip precedence not DSCP in the above?
2)why in the below bandwidth remain percent not the bandwidth percent of the interface?
class PREFERENCE
bandwidth remaining percent 81
fair-queue
class SCAVENGER
bandwidth remaining percent 1
fair-queue
class class-default
bandwidth remaining percent 9
fair-queue
in the class default i have tried bandwidth percent X with fair queue but the IOS Refused the command until i get rid of the fair-queue,why those don't work together?
thanks
jamil
07-29-2012 06:08 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
class-map match-any PREFERENCEmatch ip precedence 7 6 5
match ip precedence 4 3 2
1)why ip precedence not DSCP in the above?
Just a "quicker" way to test ToS bits, as IP Precedence only looks as first 3 bits, so for example, IP Precedence 3 would match CS3, AF31, AF32 and AF33 (it will also match the 4 private DSCP values too). If you have a need to treat different DSCP values different, they match against the DSCP values.
2)why in the below bandwidth remain percent not the bandwidth percent of the interface?class PREFERENCE
bandwidth remaining percent 81
fair-queue
class SCAVENGER
bandwidth remaining percent 1
fair-queue
class class-default
bandwidth remaining percent 9
fair-queue
in the class default i have tried bandwidth percent X with fair queue but the IOS Refused the command until i get rid of the fair-queue,why those don't work together?
I used remaining percent as it makes setting ratios easier for non-LLQ classes.
FQ and bandwidth remaining - maybe pre-HQF QoS. (An example of why it's difficult to provide correct syntax without knowing more information.)
08-07-2012 08:13 AM
Thanks for ur reply
pls can y help in the below theread
https://supportforums.cisco.com/message/3695451#3695451
thanks
jamil
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