I can immediately think of one example. Let's say you have a T-1 access link with multiple data types that include VoIP and video conferencing. You want to make sure that VoIP traffic gets its own priority queue, so let's say you give it 384k. You then want to give the video conferencing traffic another priority queue because it's such a high-visibility technology, so you allow it to use another 384k.
This would leave roughly half of the link available for other data types during periods of congestion while making sure your high priority applications (pun intended) do not drop packets and have the lowest latency possible on that link. I will be attempting exactly this sometime next year when we roll out VoIP to a branch that already has video conferencing. To make matters more interesting, this is on a frame relay link, not a point-to-point link. Lotsa fun! I had heard, though, that only one priority statement was possible. You're saying that you successfully used two? That's good news for me, I was starting to get worried. I'd be interested to find out if it truly behaved as expected when experiencing congestion. If you test this out, please let us know what you find. Regards, John >>> "VoIP Guy" 12/5/01 1:51:13 PM >>> Has anyone ever seen 2 priority queue's in LLQ? What would be the reason and how would those 2 get serviced? Round Robin? FIFO? It does work beucasue I just saw it on a config and tried it myself, but can't figure out why they did it. Steve Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=28229&t=28227 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
