[cisco-voip] QoS Question over WAN

[Jeffrey C. Ollie]

Is this using FRF.8 to translate the ATM PVC to a FR PVC?  I used to
have a similar setup between the main campus here and one of our larger
satellite campuses but we got rid of it a few weeks ago because we got
tired of all of the complaints about slowness or garbled VoIP traffic.
From talking with my provider I got the impression that the device that
they used to handle the FRF.8 translation wasn't very good at QoS.  We
switched to PtP T1s that terminate on a channelized DS3 at our end.
It's been great (other than being more expensive)...  It'll be even
better once the 28E agreement gets approved so that we can use some dark
fiber that the city owns.  We still have three other sites using FRF.8
but they are much smaller and don't put a lot of bandwidth on the wire.

On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 13:15 -0800, Voll, Scott wrote:
> I’m not as good as I would like to be when it comes to QoS so here is
> the problem.
> 
>  
> 
> ATM DS3 PVC to Frame Relay t1…… CIR supposedly 1mb.
> 
>  
> 
> I have never been able to push over 800k over the link.  I have all my
> QoS configured for 1mb.  If the client uses 800k the voice / Signally
> goes all weird.  Is this my problem.  I need to redo all my QoS with a
> CIR of 800k and that would fix it?  Or get the telco to fix it so I
> really get 1mb CIR and that fix it?
> 
>  
> 
> I’m sure(99%) I have the QoS configured correctly as TAC gave it there
> blessing.
> 
>  
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
>  
> 
> Scott
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-voip mailing list
> cisco-voip at puck.nether.net
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20061102/1701e956/attachment.bin