Anil you are almost there. If you are doing FRF.12 you need to have the "frame-relay fragment" command under the map-class.
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 4:12 AM, anil batra <anil...@yahoo.com> wrote: > I am little lost on this ( I think it 2AM affect) ... > > Module QoS, MQC and CBQFQ - all are same thing but different name > > So my question is when it says - > > (1) HQ to BR1 we are to use MLP with LFI > > (2) HQ to BR2 we are to use FRF.12 > > Then I will configure MLP with LFI for (1) with frame-relay traffic-shaping > command on physical interface And for (2) what will be my configuration, > shall it something like this - > > class-map match all media > match ip dscp ef > class-map match sig > match ip dscp cs3 > ! > ! > policy-map llq > class media > priority 60 > class sig > bandwidth 8 > class class-default > fair-queue > ! > ! > map-class frame-relay frts > frame-relay cir 729000 > frame-relay mincir 729000 > frame-relay bc 7290 > frame-relay be 729000 > ! > ! > interface serial 0/0/0:0 > frame-relay traffic-shaping > ! > !interface serial 0/0/00.1 > bandwidth 768 > frame-relay dlci 101 > ip address 162.45.10.101 > class frts > ! > ! > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > thx for your help..... > > //anil > > > > > > > > > > > > --- On *Wed, 1/14/09, Vik Malhi <vma...@ipexpert.com>* wrote: > > From: Vik Malhi <vma...@ipexpert.com> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QOS MLP 1 link and FRF Shaping the other > verification > To: "Ryan Trauernicht" <ryanstudyvo...@gmail.com>, anil...@yahoo.com > Cc: "ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com" <ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com> > Date: Wednesday, January 14, 2009, 12:54 PM > > > Agree- possible if you have separate physical interfaces at the hub site > but if its the same physical interface then ask the Proctor what he has been > smoking. > -- > Vik Malhi – CCIE #13890, CCSI #31584 > Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert, Inc. > > Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 > Fax: +1.810.454.0130 > Mailto: *vma...@ipexpert.com > > * > Join our free online support and peer group communities: > *http://www.IPexpert.com/communities > *IPexpert - The Global Leader in Self-Study, Classroom-Based, > Video-On-Demand and Audio Certification Training Tools for the Cisco CCIE > R&S Lab, CCIE Security Lab, CCIE Service Provider Lab , CCIE Voice Lab and > CCIE Storage Lab Certifications. > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > *From: *Ryan Trauernicht <ryanstudyvo...@gmail.com> > *Date: *Mon, 12 Jan 2009 18:22:42 -0600 > *To: *<anil...@yahoo.com> > *Cc: *Vik Malhi <vma...@ipexpert.com>, "ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com" < > ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com> > *Subject: *Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QOS MLP 1 link and FRF Shaping the other > verification > > You will not be asked that. That can not be done. Option 2 needs to be > configured as traditional method. > > thanks, > Ryan Trauernicht > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 6:17 PM, anil batra <anil...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > What if we are to configure in the scenario I mentioned where it says > configure > > 1. HQ to BR1 we are to use MLP with LFI > > 2. HQ to BR2 we are to use FRF.12 with MQC-FRTS (CB-Shapping way) > > In the above scenario, on HQ major( Physica) interface is same. But as you > mentioned we should not apply "Frame-relay Traffic-shaping command" for > MQC-FRTS but we will have to apply for MLP. In another words the above > scenario should be avoided and we shoudl use Leagacy FRTS only for HQ to > BR2. > > That means MLP and MQC sharing same physical interface are mutually > exclusive. And hence we shoufl use HQ to BR1 we are to use MLP with LFI and > Leagcy FRTS for HQ to BR2 we are to use FRF.12 . > > -anil > > > > > > > > --- On *Tue, 1/13/09, Ryan Trauernicht <ryanstudyvo...@gmail.com>* wrote: > > From: Ryan Trauernicht <ryanstudyvo...@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QOS MLP 1 link and FRF Shaping the other > verification > To: anil...@yahoo.com > Cc: "Vik Malhi" <vma...@ipexpert.com>, "ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com" < > ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com> > Date: Tuesday, January 13, 2009, 5:26 AM > > > You need Frame-relay Traffic-shaping command placed on the physical > interface (wha tI mean by that is Serial0/0........... NOT s0/0.101) So not > the PVC > when you use FRF.12 traditional way (aka cir, mincir, bc, be) and MLP. > > You do not put in on the physical interface when you use the CB Shaping way > for FRF.12 (aka nested policy-maps) > > > Thanks, > Ryan Trauernicht > > On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 5:49 PM, anil batra <anil...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > 1. Let's say BR1 to HQ we are to use MLP with LFI but for BR2 to HQ we are > to use FRF.12 Fragmentation. What I understand is we will use MLP with LFI > between HQ-BR1 with NO "frame-realy traffic-shaping" command on major > interface. Now on BR2 to HQ as we are supposed to use FRF.12 , in this case > we will have to use Legacy FRTS for this link but not MQC-FRTS right ??? > > 2. I am little confused whe do you need to put "frame-realy > traffic-shaping" command on major interface - > > MLP - I think NO > Legacy FRTS - I think NO > MQC-FRTS - I think YES > > regards // anil > > > --- On *Tue, 1/13/09, Vik Malhi <vma...@ipexpert.com>* wrote: > > From: Vik Malhi <vma...@ipexpert.com> > Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] QOS MLP 1 link and FRF Shaping the other > verification > To: "Ryan Trauernicht" <ryanstudyvo...@gmail.com> > Cc: "ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com" <ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com> > Date: Tuesday, January 13, 2009, 4:16 AM > > > You must do it the old school way if you are using a single physical > interface. > The old school way being FRTS as opposed to class-based shaping. > > Vik Malhi - CCIE#13890 > Senior Technical Instructor - IPexpert Inc > > Telephone: +1.810.326.1444 > Fax: +1.810.454.0130 > Mailto: vma...@ipexpert.com > > Join IPexpert's Free CCIE Peer Groups & Study Communities at > www.IPexpert.com/communities <http://www.ipexpert.com/communities> > > On Jan 12, 2009, at 2:43 PM, "Ryan Trauernicht" > <ryanstudyvo...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I know when you put the "frame-relay traffic-shaping" on the > physical interface it turns all the CIRs down to 56k. > > > > If you have 1 pipe that is MLP FRF which you need to put that command on > the interface and the other pip is just shaping FRF. I just wanted to make > sure > you can not do the nested policy-map way. You must do it the old school > map-class way for (cir, mincir, bc, be). > > > > Vik can you comment on that or anyone else who knows for sure. > > > > > > Thanks, > > Ryan Trauernicht > > > > > > > > >
