[cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS

[Ryan Huff]

Ben,

By flat network; I am to assume that there is no layer 2 partition between rtp/signaling and general data traffic?

On Jan 3, 2017, at 9:15 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:

Yeah, I have the luck of having MPLS right now, and I don't see us going iWAN for a while for various reasons. QoS on the WAN right now even isn't my issue, it's QoS on the LAN. Right now we have a relatively flat network, and certain segments of our troupe *cough*developers*cough* seems to have made our internal traffic ugly, to the point that I may have to do an analysis of it, as we're having just random periods here and there where calls just have horrible quality, of the type you normally see fixed by QoS

Ben Amick
Telecom Analyst

From: Ryan Huff [mailto:ryanhuff at outlook.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 03, 2017 8:40 PM
To: NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>>
Cc: Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>>; Cisco VoIP Group <cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>>
Subject: Re: [cisco-voip] Jabber/CIPC and QoS

It's a shame really ... MPLS is far superior IMO, for many reasons. Call it iWAN, DMVPN, AutoVPN .... whatever, it is still as Nate says, public Internet.

Try getting a 30 or 60 minute SLA with escalation after 15 minutes from a public Comcast or Time Warner/Charter package.

On Jan 3, 2017, at 7:53 PM, NateCCIE <nateccie at gmail.com<mailto:nateccie at gmail.com>> wrote:
Or take the most approach of do nothing.

My personal favorite is to use codecs where QoS matters less, like iLBC, OPUS, etc.

So many business are getting rid of the QoS capable WAN and just doing VPNs, even if they have fancy names that make it sound better than public internet.

Sent from my iPhone

On Jan 3, 2017, at 2:25 PM, Ben Amick <bamick at HumanArc.com<mailto:bamick at HumanArc.com>> wrote:
So, I know this is an age old question that's debated, but I've been wondering if anyone here has a perspective here in regards to QoS for softphones. Obviously, with hardphones, you usually partition a separate VLAN with AutoQoS/DSCP tags, but that isn't applicable with softphones.

I've heard of three different options in the past, neither of which seem to be very simple to deploy, but all seem to be Jabber-centric.

1.      Configuring windows to perform DSCP tagging, and do DSCP QoS on the switches they are connected to, as well as trusting the device. Problems: Requires users to be local admins, openings for abuse and network impact due to blind PC trust.

2.      Configuring your switches with an access list that recognizes the ports Jabber does outbound to attach DSCP tags to them. Problems: Other programs could theoretically use those ports

3.      Installing Medianet services on all jabber clients; Configure all switches for medianet tagging. Problem: (I think?) Requires newer switches to use, maybe needs an additional server (I vaguely remember possibly needing prime collab?)?

Maybe I'm missing some things, but what approach have you guys taken for softphone/Jabber QoS? And on top of that, what options are there for CIPC (I know there's the auto qos trust cisco-softphone for cisco switches, but I don't believe there's a solution other than #1 for non-cisco switches)?

Ben Amick
Telecom Analyst


Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. Thank you
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/avndzgOcxMQrhoupod7b9EV79CXCQkmnSkNMV4QsCQkmnSkNPPX9J55BZVYsY-Urhhsd79EVLuWdPp3lpmawECSHIdzrBPpdJnor6TbCSnQTXeffZvzhOZsQsFThWZOWr8V7AhPdTC7xTkhjmKCHtBfBgY-F6lK1FJ4SCrLOb0VVdOXMWVKVIDeqR4INpKNnwqj-f0T1dnoovaAVgtHBFkJkKpH9oT4JI2rrHEaGTc-JiLbCQnAkPhOr1vF6y0QJSBiRiVCIBziWq808Qwg-e2gq5x8Qgr10Qg0fkodIK6Y1tK-rNm>
_______________________________________________
cisco-voip mailing list
cisco-voip at puck.nether.net<mailto:cisco-voip at puck.nether.net>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip<http://cp.mcafee.com/d/2DRPoOd2hJ5xVBwQsICzAsCrKrhhpvpj73AjhOrhhpvpj7ffICQkmnTDNPPXxJ55MQsCzCZXETdAdlBoG2yrqKMSdKndASRtxIrsKrpvjvIUY_R-d7bRPhODt7HTbFIzAuh7cTuou7th5dqWqJSk-l3PWApmU6CQPqpK_8I3DATbL3HCXCOsVHkiP5CX5u1FfUY3s4RtxxYGjB1SKmBiRiVCIBzsiSM9JKKwGHsPWRaYKrhuhjd79I5-Aq83iTqlblbCqOmdbFEw0zi13UU91Em4zh1I43h00ZhwSOUryKrT3IPkd-jE>

Confidentiality Note: This message is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and destroy the material in its entirety, whether electronic or hard copy. Thank you
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-voip/attachments/20170104/46eda1b1/attachment.html>