9300 QoS Migration

[mumbles202]

I'm trying to migrate an existing QoS configuration on a router to a 9300.  On the router I have this:

class-map match-any class1
 match access-group 101
class-map match-any class2
 match access-group 102
class-map match-any class3
 match access-group 103
class-map match-any class4
 match access-group 104

policy-map mymap
 class class1
  priority 1
 class class2
 class class3
 class class4
 
access-list 101 permit ip any any dscp af46
access-list 102 permit ip any any dscp af23
access-list 102 permit tcp any eq 1334 any
access-list 103 permit ip any any dscp af41
access-list 103 permit tcp any range 5440 5446 any
access-list 104 permit ip any any


int Gi 1/0/2
 service-policy output mymap

I've added this so far on the 9300 and I can apply it to the egress interface w/o any issues:

class-map match-any class1
 match dscp ef
class-map match-any class2
 match dscp af23


policy-map mymap
 class class1
  priority level 1
 class class2

int Gi 1/0/2
 service-policy output mymap

When I try to add an access group to match based on a port however I'm getting the following error:

Invalid queuing class-map!!! Queuing actions supported only with dscp/cos/qos-group/precedence/exp based classification!!!

[Joseph W. Doherty]

My "guess" is the 9300 doesn't support IP UDP/TCP port matching with an egress policy.  I would further "guess" it would support such within an ingress policy.

If correct, what you would need to do is use an ingress policy to match the IP UDP/TCP port, then "tag" the packet (perhaps using a qos-group as I recall that's only "known" within device) and then in the egress policy, match against your tag.

[mumbles202]

Thanks for this.  So I've found if I remove the "priority level 1" from the above configuration I'm able to apply it to the interface w/o any issues.  I tried the following but got the same error message:

access-list 101 permit ip any any dscp af46
access-list 102 permit ip any any dscp af23
access-list 102 permit tcp any eq 1334 any

class-map match-any classingress1
 match access-group 101
class-map match-any classingress2
 match access-group 102


policy-map INGRESS_QUEING
 class classingress1
  set dscp ef
 class classingress2
  set qos-group 2

class-map match-all Class1Egress
 match qos-group 1
class-map match-all Class2Egress
 match qos-group 2


policy-map EGRESS_QUEING
 class Class1Egress
  priority level 1
 class Class2Egress

[Joseph W. Doherty]

I'm a bit confused.  So you're saying you only see the error when using "priority level 1"?  If so, I could see that as an error on a L3 switch as on a router that's part of a two tier LLQ whereas L3 switches often only have one hardware PQ.

[mumbles202]

Correct. I thought the error was with the rest of the configuration but it applies fine when i remove the priority statement. Replacing the router with the 9300 so trying to match the old configuration as closely as possible. 

[Joseph W. Doherty]

Ok, then likely the 9300 doesn't support all the QoS features of your replaced router (which isn't unexpected, as L3 switches often only have a QoS subset of QoS features compared to a router).