James, I started to respond to this yesterday and realized I was going down the wrong path. I did run into this article which I have not had a chance to digest yet:
http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/42427 It seems that they may be talking about the same exact example you're talking about. How is the policy being applied in your example so that it limits the calls per switch port? Are you applying it at each interface inbound to the switch? If I'm understanding this right I believe that unless you have some other form of CAC subsequent calls would cause all call audio to be poor due to drops (for all calls). I'm not clear exactly on what is going to happen to the signaling traffic. -Jeff On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 12:07 PM, James Key <j...@jackhenry.com> wrote: > Anyone have any guidance on the questions below I posted yesterday? > > > > -James > > > > *From:* ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto: > ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] *On Behalf Of *James Key > *Sent:* Wednesday, August 26, 2009 2:09 PM > *To:* ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com > *Subject:* [OSL | CCIE_Voice] 3750 QoS Question > > > > Reading over the QoS SRND and trying to get a better understanding of 3750 > QoS and more specifically, the Conditionally-Trusted IP Phone + PC with > Scavenger-Class QoS (Basic) Model. I understand the ACLs and marking traffic > as well as queuing, but am having some difficulty in understanding the > theory behind the policing within the Policy-Maps. > > > > example: > > > > class-map match-all VVLAN-VOICE > > match access-group name VVLAN-VOICE > > > > class-map match-all VVLAN-CALL-SIGNALING > > match access-group name VVLAN-CALL-SIGNALING > > > > policy-map IPPHONE+PC-BASIC > > class VVLAN-VOICE > > set ip dscp 46 > > police 128000 8000 exceed-action drop > > class VVLAN-CALL-SIGNALING > > set ip dscp 24 > > police 32000 8000 exceed-action policed-dscp-transmit > > > > > > ip access list extended VVLAN-VOICE > > permit udp 10.1.110.0 0.0.0.255 any range 16384 32767 > > > > ip access list extended VVLAN-CALL-SIGNALING > > permit tcp 10.1.110.0 0.0.0.255 any range 2000 2002 > > > > > > the comment for the police statement under class VVLAN-VOICE states that > this will only allow one voice call per switchport VVLAN. So my question > is (I hope this doesn’t sound to dumb!), what happens to a 2nd,3rd, and so > on concurrent call that may come from an IP Phone connected to a switchport > with this policy? Same question for the police statement under class > VVLAN-CALL-SIGNALING. Is it that any signaling traffic that exceeds 32k > will be marked down to CS1? > > > > > > any clarification on this would be much appreciated! > > > > > > James > > > > > > > > NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are > intended > > exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The > message, > > together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged > information. > > Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or > distribution > > is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please > > immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies. > > NOTICE: This electronic mail message and any files transmitted with it are > intended > exclusively for the individual or entity to which it is addressed. The > message, > together with any attachment, may contain confidential and/or privileged > information. > Any unauthorized review, use, printing, saving, copying, disclosure or > distribution > is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please > immediately advise the sender by reply email and delete all copies. > > > _______________________________________________ > For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please > visit www.ipexpert.com > >
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
