[c-nsp] FR QOS

[Akella Vardhana Srikant]

Hi,

As of now, I am testing on Cisco 3845 Series. After I gave the Shape command, it has worked. I am right now testing in the lab and scenario is like this 

Cisco 7507 (PE)<---------E1 Link (2 PVC's)back to back------->Cisco 3845(CE)

Couples of queries

1) Does the "bandwidth percent xx" and "shape average percent 50" command which we are applying in the classes mean the same? 

2) Can you little elaborate the statement "both PVCs over the 
Provider network should be configured to be able to peak to the full 
Line speed. If PVCs were limited at the provider network each to a
Specific bandwidth, this QoS approach won't work." 

I would like to understand the precautionary measurements I need to take when deploying this config.

Regards,
Srikant

-----Original Message-----
From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:oboehmer at cisco.com] 
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 3:22 PM
To: Akella Vardhana Srikant; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
Subject: RE: [c-nsp] FR QOS


> 
> I have done the same config but I am getting the below error message
> . Could you please let me know in case any modifications are required
> in the config.  
> 
> chester(config)#int s2/0
> chester(config-if)#service-policy output Out-s4/1/0
> CBWFQ : Hierarchy supported only if shaping is configured in this
class 
> chester(config-if)#


This is what I mentioned, some platforms require you to apply shaping.
Which platform do you have? Can you add a "shape average <x>" in your
"class dlci-401"?

What is the exact environment? Is this back-to-back FR connection? 

	oli


> policy-map Out-s4/1/0
>  class dlci-401
>   bandwidth percent 50
>   service-policy customer-1
>  class dlci-402
> 
>   bandwidth percent 25
> 
>   service-policy customer-2
> 
> 
> 
> chester#sh run int s2/0
> 
> Building configuration...
> 
> 
> 
> Current configuration : 136 bytes
> 
> !
> 
> interface Serial2/0
> 
>  description To Stanster
> 
>  no ip address
> 
>  encapsulation frame-relay IETF
> 
>  map-group test
> 
>  dsu bandwidth 44210
> 
> end
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Srikant
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:oboehmer at cisco.com]
> Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 3:02 PM
> To: Akella Vardhana Srikant; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] FR QOS
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> I have some queries
> 
>> 
> 
>> policy-map Out-s4/1/0
> 
>>  class dlci-401
> 
>>   bandwidth percent 50
> 
>>   service-policy customer-1
> 
>>  class dlci-402
> 
>>   bandwidth percent 25
> 
>>   service-policy customer-2
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> In the above statements, you are hardcoding a bandwidth percent value
> 
>> under of the class Like "dlci-401" and "dlci-402" . After you define
> 
>> this , does the Router allow us to share bandwidth between VPNs.
> 
> 
> 
> Sure, this is the reason why you need to apply the policy at the
> 
> physical interface. If VPN-1 doesn't use "his" bandwidth, VPN-2 can
> use 
> 
> it.
> 
> 
> 
>       oli
> 
> 
> 
>> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
> 
>> From: Oliver Boehmer (oboehmer) [mailto:oboehmer at cisco.com]
> 
>> Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2005 2:51 PM
> 
>> To: Akella Vardhana Srikant; cisco-nsp at puck.nether.net
> 
>> Subject: RE: [c-nsp] FR QOS
> 
>> 
> 
>> 
> 
>>> I need some help with respect to the FR QOS. In our scenario, we
>>> have 
> 
>>> 2 PVC's configured under single E1 Link and PVC belongs to
>>> respective 
> 
>>> customer. The respective PVC has again 4 different types of traffic
> 
>>> such as Voice, FTP, etc.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> The Demand is that Total E1 BW should be utilized among to the 2
> 
>>> VPN's and again among the respective classes of traffic such as
> 
>>> Voice, FTP, etc. The QOS config should be defined in such a way that
> 
>>> in case PVC-1 is down then PVC-2 should utilize all the E1 BW and
> 
>>> then sub divide among all the 4 classes.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> Similarly it should be other way round also.
> 
>>> 
> 
>>> Can some body tell me what sort of QOS config has to deployed for
> 
>>> achieving this ?
> 
>> 
> 
>> You need some form of hierarchical CBWFQ using the "match fr-dlci"
> 
>> class-map classification in the parent and your customer-specific
> 
>> classes at the child. you would then apply the policy-map at the
> 
>> physical FR interface, not at the customer-specific sub-interfaces.
> 
>> Please note that some platforms (for example 3600) require you to
> 
>> shape
> 
>> at the parent.
> 
>> 
> 
>> Here's an example:
> 
>> 
> 
>> class-map match-all platin
> 
>>  match ip precedence 5
> 
>> class-map match-all gold
> 
>>  match ip precedence 3
> 
>> class-map match-all silber
> 
>>  match ip precedence 2
> 
>> !
> 
>> class-map match-all dlci-402
> 
>>  match fr-dlci 402
> 
>> class-map match-all dlci-401
> 
>>  match fr-dlci 401
> 
>> !
> 
>> !
> 
>> policy-map customer-1
> 
>>  class platin
> 
>>   priority 64
> 
>>  class gold
> 
>>   bandwidth 64
> 
>>  class silber
> 
>>   bandwidth 64
> 
>>  class class-default
> 
>>   random-detect
> 
>>   bandwidth 64
> 
>> !
> 
>> policy-map customer-2
> 
>>  ....
> 
>> !
> 
>> policy-map Out-s4/1/0
> 
>>  class dlci-401
> 
>>   bandwidth percent 50
> 
>>   service-policy customer-1
> 
>>  class dlci-402
> 
>>   bandwidth percent 25
> 
>>   service-policy customer-2
> 
>> !
> 
>> interface Serial4/1/0
> 
>>  bandwidth 512000
> 
>>  no ip address
> 
>>  no ip directed-broadcast
> 
>>  encapsulation frame-relay
> 
>>  load-interval 30
> 
>>  frame-relay intf-type dce
> 
>>  service-policy output Out-s4/1/0
> 
>> !
> 
>> int Serial4/1/0.1
> 
>>  ip address ...
> 
>>  frame-relay interface-dlci 401
> 
>> int Serial4/1/0.2
> 
>>  ip address ...
> 
>>  frame-relay interface-dlci 402
> 
>> 
> 
>>     oli