[j-nsp] EoMPLS data rate

[Vincent]

Thanks Darren and Dave,

Traffic shaping is fine - how do I do this on Juniper (I'm more familiar
with Cisco)? Can you point me to some document?

Vincent


On 29 November 2013 14:37, Darren O'Connor <darrenoc at outlook.com> wrote:

> You could shape outbound on each side. If you do police the customer could
> just shape outbound from their end which would prevent drops
>
> Thanks
> Darren
> http://www.mellowd.co.uk/ccie
>
>
>
> > Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 12:58:39 +0000
> > From: me at geordish.org
> > To: lamusiqueduhasard at gmail.com
> > CC: juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > Subject: Re: [j-nsp] EoMPLS data rate
> >
> > Have you thought about traffic shaping instead?
> >
> >
> > On 29 November 2013 10:54, Vincent <lamusiqueduhasard at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > we are trying to build for a customer an EoMPLS circuit of 10 Mbps
> over a
> > > GE interface.
> > >
> > > Configuration looks like this at this moment:
> > >
> > > dude at LAB-MX960> show configuration protocols l2circuit
> > > neighbor 172.16.50.1 {
> > > interface ge-0/1/1.0 {
> > > virtual-circuit-id 1;
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > ... with something similar at the other end of the network. This is
> easy
> > > and works quite well.
> > >
> > > Next step is to limit the traffic to 10 Mbps.
> > >
> > > We were thinking of using a simple policer like:
> > >
> > > dude at LAB-MX960> show configuration firewall policer 10M_fwp
> > > if-exceeding {
> > > bandwidth-limit 10m;
> > > burst-size-limit 15k;
> > > }
> > > then discard;
> > >
> > > ... and apply it on the ingress interface, but maybe that's a little
> bit
> > > too rough (in terms of packet drops and TCP backoff)? Furthermore we
> are
> > > not sure on how to select the burst parameter.
> > >
> > > Is there any better way to achieve this ? Note that the customer
> should not
> > > be able to burst for a long time, and have this traffic above 10 Mbps
> go to
> > > a best-effort QoS: we just want to limit its traffic to a certain level
> > > without completely breaking its TCP connections.
> > >
> > > Does this all make sense?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Vincent
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > juniper-nsp mailing list juniper-nsp at puck.nether.net
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
>