Most of the reference material I have seen on cisco.com has RT video being marked DSCP 34 and mapped to a CBWFQ.
However, part of the Enterprise MediaNet QoS Design document refers to TelePresence traffic being in the strict priority queue which should be limited to 33% max of lin bandwidth. Being in the LLQ makes sense to me but everything else I see has it as lower priority.
Are these documents contradictory or is it me? If it's not me, what works best in practice?
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.
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.
Often the reason different QoS documentation conflicts has much to do when it was published, as QoS recommendations are often evolving.
The reason why RT video has often been recommended not to be placed into LLQ assumes the latter has other "more critical" RT traffic such as VoIP. As video tends to be both more bandwidth hungry and bandwidth bursty, having it in the same queue as VoIP might degrade VoIP.
BTW, a "compromise" approach, if the RT video has separate traffic flows for its voice vs. its video components, the former can be placed into LLQ with other VoIP and the latter in a "great" service video class.
When it comes to TelePresense, as Cisco markets it like "being there", and it's often marketed to upper management, recommending it being placed into LLQ helps insure it gets the very best service. (Technically, TelePresense is really just HD video conferencing, but again, its "users" often are higher on the totem pole than those who use SD video conferencing. Often notice "QoS" differences between calling a sales line [often no waiting] vs. calling a support line? Sometimes QoS isn't about a technical difference but what's considered important to the business.)
Could TelePresense be adverse to other LLQ traffic? It can, but when you're doing TelePresense deployments, considering often who the "users" will be, you insure there's ample bandwidth for it (which would also help insure there's ample bandwidth for any concurrent traffic like VoIP, otherwise the latter might be adverse to TelePresense too.)
We'd like to learn a little about your network, your pain points with monitoring an enterprise network, and your preferred solution and workflow to solve issues.
We ask that you complete our brief survey: https://ciscoux.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV...
Have you ever wondered why pluggable optics exist? Have you ever wondered what acronyms like QSFP, LR4, FEC, and PAM4 actually mean? In this episode I continue my conversation with my colleague Ray Nering. He explains to me how a lot of these came to be, ...
Community Live- Smart Licensing Using Policy (Routing) – A Simplified Licensing Approach
(Live event - Tuesday, 18 May, 2021 at 9:00 am Pacific/ 1:00 pm Eastern / 7:00 pm Paris)
This event had place on Tuesday 18th, May 2021 at 9:00 hrs PDT
Today I'm going to write SD-WAN Overview & Advanced Deployment Lab Part ||* check out SD-WAN Overview & Advanced Deployment Lab Part | through this link : https://community.cisco.com/t5/networking-documents/sd-wan-overview-amp-advan...
Have you ever wondered why pluggable optics exist? Have you ever wondered what acronyms like QSFP, LR4, FEC, and PAM4 actually mean? In this first episode I start a conversation with my colleague Ray Nering. He explains to me how a lot of these came to be...