Dmitri ,
On the 7500 and 7200 , it treats all Packets Equally when ACL is not Applied.
Thanks
Yogi
At 12:47 AM 5/21/2001 +0200, Dmitri Kalintsev wrote:
>On Fri, May 18, 2001 at 04:20:36PM -0700, Yogeshwaran Raghunathan wrote:
> > I would say that depends on Platforms.
> >
> > In New one like 28948gl3 , It will give precedence to Routing updates and
> > drop the Packets with Lower Precedence.
>
>2948G-L3 you meant? :)
>
>Platforms in question are 7500 and 7200. Configuration command that worries
>me is this or alike:
>
>int type x/y/z
>rate-limit input <rate> <burst> <burst> conform-action set-prec-transmit 0
>exceed-action set-prec-transmit 0
>
>which guys here used to use (and it's widely deployed) to get rid of any
>preferential treatment for any kind of traffic. So, now I understand that
>routing updates *will* be matched by this statement, but then another
>question remanis:
>
>If my interface has "Queueing strategy: VIP-based fair queuing", does it
>give any preferential treatment to routing updates when they have original
>precedence of 6?
>
>SY,
>--
> CCNP, CCDP (R&S) Dmitri E. Kalintsev
> CDPlayer@irc Network Architect @ connect.com.au
> dek @ connect.com.au phone: +61 39 674 3913 fax: 251 3666
> http://-UNAVAIL- UIN:7150410 cell: +61 41 335 1634
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Aug 04 2002 - 04:12:38 EDT