12-12-2012 05:11 AM - edited 03-04-2019 06:23 PM
hello all,
I know that http traffic is asymetric, I mean that outgoing traffic has a smaller volume than incoming trafic. (web browsing, no file transfert from inside)
my question :
does it make sense from a QOS point of view to allocate a smaller bandwidth on the inside interface for outgoing packets and a greater one on the outside interface for the returning traffic ?
Thank you for replying.
Best regards.
V.
Solved! Go to Solution.
12-13-2012 01:57 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
vrz rrr wrote:
hello,
why does it mean ?
Regards.
V.
"it" = QoS policy
"why" = for the reasons you mentioned in your original post.
I.e. Often QoS policies can customized or unique for traffic that's expected to pass through them.
As another example, if you only use FTP to transfer some data from the Internet but never to it, a "down" policy might have special QoS treatment for the expected FTP traffic; and "up" policy no special treatment, at all, for FTP traffic.
12-12-2012 09:58 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
It may/could.
12-13-2012 01:37 AM
hello,
why does it mean ?
Regards.
V.
12-13-2012 01:57 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
vrz rrr wrote:
hello,
why does it mean ?
Regards.
V.
"it" = QoS policy
"why" = for the reasons you mentioned in your original post.
I.e. Often QoS policies can customized or unique for traffic that's expected to pass through them.
As another example, if you only use FTP to transfer some data from the Internet but never to it, a "down" policy might have special QoS treatment for the expected FTP traffic; and "up" policy no special treatment, at all, for FTP traffic.
12-13-2012 11:15 AM
Ok, but I do not understand why you are answering that way, along with that "legal" and awful disclaimer.
Regards anyway.
V.
12-13-2012 12:25 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
Laugh - yes the "legal" stuff above is awful! Alas, it's in response to what's in the Cisco User Agreement to use this site. I've been in court over contract dispute and the Cisco's user agreement shouldn't be taken too lightly, but I digress.
If my answer still isn't clear or you feel your question isn't answered, let me know.
Your original question was:
my question :
does it make sense from a QOS point of view to allocate a smaller bandwidth on the inside interface for outgoing packets and a greater one on the outside interface for the returning traffic ?
I originally answered "It may/could." a very brief way of saying yes, it may make sense or it could make sense from a QoS point of view to allocate smaller bandwidth on the inside interface for outgoing packets and a greater one on the outside interface for the returning traffic.
The reason for may/could, it might not too. QoS depends on what you're trying and/or need to accomplish with QoS. QoS policies in each direction might be identical or very much different.
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