Hi Scott If the question is to restrict the voice bandwidth out of a port to 25% of the total then the configuration you have will work. If however you enable the priority queue out then the shape command no longer affects queue 1 and there will be no restriction on the amount of traffic through the priority queue unless your other traffic fills the link. I did a test on a 3750 where I had a similar configuration to your but with the priority queue enabled. I could send 1 Gbps with voice traffic through the interface, only voice traffic was sent. When I removed the priority out command the amount of voice traffic dropped to 25% of the bandwidth. I hope this helps.
Regards Peter From: ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com [mailto:ccie_voice-boun...@onlinestudylist.com] On Behalf Of scott carruthers Sent: 16. februar 2010 04:31 To: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Subject: Re: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Adjust 3750 Egress Priority Queue Bandwidth Bump - anyone have thoughts on this one? ________________________________ From: scarruthe...@hotmail.com To: ccie_voice@onlinestudylist.com Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 10:40:58 -0800 Subject: [OSL | CCIE_Voice] Adjust 3750 Egress Priority Queue Bandwidth I wanted some thoughts on how others would handle a request to tweak the amount of bandwidth availble to an egress priority queue on a 3750. So for example a request to allocate 25% of available bandwidth for switchports connected to IP phones on the 3750. I have heard suggestions to handle this in the following manner - this is assuming auto qos voip trust cisco-phone has been run on the port already: interface fa 1/0/2 no priority-queue out srr-queue bandwidth shape 4 0 0 0 srr-queue bandwidth share 0 33 33 33 But I'm struggling to see that this meets the requirement. In this configuration we would be enabling shaping of queue 1 and assigning it 25% of available bandwidth. Then assigning remaining bandwidth equally to the remaining three queues. But this does not appear to be meeting the requirement of assigning the priority queue 25% of the bandwidth. We would be assigning the queue that RTP traffic is placed in by default 25% of total bandwidth but the initial no priority queue out command technically disables a strict priority queue and thus it does not seem to fit the requirement. Thoughts? While I struggle to see the disablement of the priority queue as strictly meeting the requirement - I also find no explicit means to allocate the priority queue a strict amount of bandwidth (I.e. the equal if the ingress queue command - mls qos srr-queue input bandwidth 75 25 that could be used to meet this requirement for default priority ingress queue 1. How about skipping the initial no priority queue-out command but only issuing the shape and share commands as specified above? Wouldn't leaving the priority queue enabled and assigning it a shape value of 25% (1/4) satsify the requirement better? Thanks Scott ________________________________ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.<http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469227/direct/01/> ________________________________ Hotmail: Trusted email with powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.<http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469227/direct/01/>
_______________________________________________ For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit www.ipexpert.com
