[c-nsp] Rate limitting question

[Tim Franklin]

> *if* the interfaces supports mqc, that is a much better path 
> to go than
> using car. mqc supercedes the functionality in car and gives you much
> more control. control is a good thing :-)

I'll second that.  We're using MQC even for simple shapers / policers, where
possible - partly on a recommendation from Cisco that it's less of a CPU hog
than CAR, and partly because moving between shaping, QoS, shaping+QoS all
stays in the same framework.  Less pain for config and support techs all
round.

Regards,
Tim.

-- 
____________   Tim Franklin                 e: tim at colt.net 
\C/\O/\L/\T/   Product Engineering Manager  w: www.colt.net 
 V  V  V  V    Managed Data Services        t: +44 20 7863 5714 
Data | Voice | Managed Services             f: +44 20 7863 5876