11-17-2020 06:12 AM
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!!!
11-17-2020 07:54 AM - edited 11-18-2020 03:08 PM
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.
11-18-2020 03:19 PM
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
11-18-2020 05:55 PM
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.
11-18-2020 06:46 PM
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.
11-19-2020 08:01 AM
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).
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