Hi Derek, I heard this question before, I would agree on your answer, but what about also using, LLQ within a CBWFQ, in addition of that priority queue is serviced with a strict priority scheduler in which I do not see any , and in the event of congestion, if the priority queue traffic exceeds the bandwidth guarantee, a congestion-aware policer is used to drop the exceeding traffic.
Just a thought Thank -- Victor Cappuccio www.vcappuccio.wordpress.com On Feb 18, 2008 12:23 AM, Derek Winchester <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Someone asked me a very good question yesterday and I am still > confused if I gave him the correct answer. He gave me a scenario that > states that he has to limit all IP Precedence 3 traffic out of an > interface to 256k, but he cannot use policing or rate-limiting. My > answer was to use shaping. But from my experience, doesn't the word > "limit" negates that as a possible answer? Even though you can use > shaping to limit, I was always under the impression when studying for > the CCIE that if they use the word limit that means no shaping. Can > someone help ease my conscience? >
