cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
644
Views
0
Helpful
6
Replies
Highlighted
Beginner

Failed to commit QoS policy in bundle interface

Dear all,

I have a case as below.

 

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01#show running-config policy-map QUEUING_TO_PE

Mon Jan 14 00:46:59.623 HANOI

policy-map QUEUING_TO_PE

class PQ1

  priority level 1

  police rate percent 100

  !

 !

 class PQ2

  priority level 2

  police rate percent 100

  !

 !

 class WFQ4

  bandwidth percent 33

 !

 class WFQ3

  bandwidth percent 26

 !

 class WFQ2

  bandwidth percent 20

 !

 class WFQ1

  bandwidth percent 13

 !

 class class-default

  bandwidth percent 8

  random-detect discard-class 0 60 ms 100 ms

 !

 end-policy-map

!

 

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01#configure terminal

 

Mon Jan 14 00:42:29.384 HANOI

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01(config)#interface bundle-ether 25

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01(config-if)#no service-policy output

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01(config-if)#service-policy output QUEUING_TO_PE

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01(config-if)#commit

Mon Jan 14 00:43:36.641 HANOI

% Failed to commit one or more configuration items during a pseudo-atomic operation. All changes made have been reverted. Please issue 'show configuration failed [inheritance]' from this session to view the errors

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:NTH9205CRT01.CKV.CRS16.01(config-if)#show configuration failed [inheritance]

 

Mon Jan 14 00:43:47.840 HANOI

!! SEMANTIC ERRORS: This configuration was rejected by

!! the system due to semantic errors. The individual

!! errors with each failed configuration command can be

!! found below.

 

interface Bundle-Ether25

service-policy output QUEUING_TO_PE

!!% 'qos_ea' detected the 'fatal' condition 'qos policy is not supported'

!

end

But when I've configured under another bundle interface (BE31), it has been permitted.

 

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01#configure terminal
RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01(config)#interface Bundle-Ether31
RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01(config-if)#no service-policy output
RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01(config-if)#service-policy output QUEUING_TO_PE
RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01(config-if)#commit

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01(config-if)#

I figure out the interface member of BE35 belong to FP-140, instead of 40x10Ge as BE31.

Bundle-Ether31 is up, line protocol is up
  Interface state transitions: 1
  Hardware is Aggregated Ethernet interface(s), address is b0aa.77ba.8018
     No. of members in this bundle: 2
      TenGigE0/0/0/31              Full-duplex  10000Mb/s    Active          
      TenGigE0/0/0/38              Full-duplex  10000Mb/s    Active      

 

Bundle-Ether25 is up, line protocol is up
  Interface state transitions: 1
     No. of members in this bundle: 4
      TenGigE0/6/0/0               Full-duplex  10000Mb/s    Active          
      TenGigE0/6/0/1               Full-duplex  10000Mb/s    Active          
      TenGigE0/6/0/2               Full-duplex  10000Mb/s    Active          
      TenGigE0/6/0/3               Full-duplex  10000Mb/s    Active         

 

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01#admin show platform
Mon Jan 14 08:15:45.139 HANOI
Node          Type              PLIM               State           Config State
------------- ----------------- ------------------ --------------- ---------------
0/0/CPU0      LSP-X             40-10GbE           IOS XR RUN      PWR,NSHUT,MON
0/5/CPU0      LSP-X             4-100GbE           IOS XR RUN      PWR,NSHUT,MON
0/6/CPU0      FP-140G           14-10GbE           IOS XR RUN      PWR,NSHUT,MON
0/8/CPU0      FP-140G           14-10GbE           IOS XR RUN      PWR,NSHUT,MON
0/9/CPU0      LSP-X             4-100GbE           IOS XR RUN      PWR,NSHUT,MON
0/10/CPU0     LSP-X             4-100GbE           IOS XR RUN      PWR,NSHUT,MON
0/RP0/CPU0    RP(Active)        N/A                IOS XR RUN      PWR,NSHUT,MON
0/RP1/CPU0    RP(Standby)       N/A                IOS XR RUN      PWR,NSHUT,MON

 

Does the FP-140G affect to the QoS configuration? Please let me know it any documentation or advice for me.

Thank in advance.

6 REPLIES 6
Highlighted
Cisco Employee

Can we try reducing the policer to less than 100% and try to apply it to the FP140 card?

Highlighted

Dear guy,

We applied the policer with the total bandwidth of PQ1 and PQ2 queues was less than 100% as below.

policy-map QUEUING_TO_PE
class PQ1
  priority level 1
  police rate percent 29
  !
 !
 class PQ2
  priority level 2
  police rate percent 70
  !

 

But now we want to expand the bandwidth limitation for PQ1 and PQ2 queues up to 100% as the supporting IOS XR 6.1.4.

Highlighted

The total policer needs to be below 100% for that card combination

Highlighted

Thanks for your response. I've submitted this case to Cisco TAC for supporting.

Highlighted
Cisco Employee

There is limited QoS support on FP vs LSP-X cards. 

I am not sure if multiple priority queues are supported on FP-140 cards.

 

Highlighted

Dear Mimtiaz,

We can apply the multiple priority queues as the previous policy-map. But the total bandwidth is less than 100% for both PQ1 and PQ2 queues.

 

RP/0/RP0/CPU0:CRS16.01#show running-config policy-map QUEUING_TO_PE
Mon Jan 14 00:46:59.623 HANOI
policy-map QUEUING_TO_PE
class PQ1
  priority level 1
  police rate percent 29
  !
 !
 class PQ2
  priority level 2
  police rate percent 70
  !
 !
 class WFQ4
  bandwidth percent 33
 !
 class WFQ3
  bandwidth percent 26
 !
 class WFQ2
  bandwidth percent 20
 !
 class WFQ1
  bandwidth percent 13
 !
 class class-default
  bandwidth percent 8
  random-detect discard-class 0 60 ms 100 ms
 !
 end-policy-map