[nsp] QoS issues with LLQ, Fair Queue and Frame Relay
Eric Wieling
eric at fnords.org
Mon Aug 11 13:08:07 EDT 2003
As I understand it the ATA-186 in SIP mode uses UDP port 5060 for
control messages. The voice-access-list should match that.
On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 11:54, Voll, Scott wrote:
> Are you dedicating bandwidth to the control protocol? I'm doing
> everything with ip precendence and dscp bits so I'm not sure which ports
> you need to add if they are not all ready in your ACL?!? I would also
> try the header compression. That takes the header from 40 bits to 2.
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Wieling [mailto:eric at fnords.org]
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 9:48 AM
> To: Voll, Scott
> Subject: RE: [nsp] QoS issues with LLQ, Fair Queue and Frame Relay
>
> We are trying to do two G729 streams. HOWEVER, I'm seeing high latency
> for packets that match voice-access-list even when there is NO voice
> traffic (just an ATA-186 registering to my SIP server).
>
> On Mon, 2003-08-11 at 11:43, Voll, Scott wrote:
> > How many calls are you trying to make and what codec? You are only
> > prioritizing 64k. You need to add up how many calls and how much
> > bandwidth per call and make that your priority **** not just 64. 64
> > will take care of one G711 call. Or maybe 3 calls at like G729/ G723
> > etc.
> >
> > You might also look at "frame-relay ip tcp header-compression" or
> > "frame-relay ip rtp header-compression" to help get you some more
> > bandwidth.
> >
> > Hope that helps
> >
> > Scott
> >
> > -----Original Message----- From: Eric Wieling [mailto:eric at fnords.org]
>
> >
> > I'm having trouble with getting QoS working. I looked at
> >
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk652/tk698/technologies_configuration_e
> > xample09186a0080094af9.shtml and decided to go withLLQ rather than IP
> > RTP Priority because we will eventually want to prioritize traffic in
> > addition to RTP traffic. What I'm seeing is that the RTP traffic is
> NOT
> > being prioritized over other traffic. I'm also seeing what looks like
> > random problems with TCP connections (users are complaining about not
> > being able to connect to our mail server, etc.
> >
> > We have a Frame Relay network in a hub and spoke configuration. QoS
> was
> > configured at each of the offices.
> >
> > I've pasted part of our config in hopes that someone out there can see
> > what I might be doing wrong. ANY help or pointers to additional
> > information would be helpful.
> >
> > System image file is "flash:c2600-ik9o3s3-mz.122-15.T5.bin"
> >
> > ip cef
> >
> > class-map match-all voice-class-map
> > match access-group name voice-access-list
> >
> > policy-map traffic-policy-map
> > class voice-class-map
> > priority 64
> > class class-default
> > fair-queue
> >
> > interface Serial0/1
> > description Connected to BellSouth
> > bandwidth 768
> > no ip address
> > encapsulation frame-relay
> > no fair-queue
> > frame-relay traffic-shaping
> > frame-relay lmi-type ansi
> >
> > interface Serial0/1.1 point-to-point
> > description morrison
> > bandwidth 384
> > ip address 172.16.0.41 255.255.255.252
> > frame-relay interface-dlci 201
> > class traffic-map-class
> >
> > ip access-list extended voice-access-list
> > permit udp any any range 16384 37276
> > permit udp any eq 5036 any
> > permit udp any any eq 5036
> > permit udp any eq 5060 any
> > permit udp any any eq 5060
> >
> > map-class frame-relay traffic-map-class
> > frame-relay cir 384000
> > frame-relay bc 3840
> > frame-relay be 0
> > frame-relay mincir 384000
> > service-policy output traffic-policy-map
> > frame-relay fragment 480
--
BTEL Consulting
850-484-4535 x2111 (Office)
504-595-3916 x2111 (Experimental)
877-552-0838 (Backup Phone)
More information about the cisco-nsp
mailing list