I didn't get dual-fifo on my serial, with either a frf.12 nor frame-relay traffic-shaping and I have 12.2.6a. I have seen dual-fifo though
STeve ""John Neiberger"" wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I'll make it easy on you. :-) Take a look at this output: > > RNRTH#sho run int s0/0 > Building configuration... > > Current configuration : 244 bytes > ! > interface Serial0/0 > no ip address > encapsulation frame-relay > no ip mroute-cache > tx-ring-limit 14 > tx-queue-limit 14 > no fair-queue > frame-relay traffic-shaping > end > > RNRTH#sho int s0/0 > Serial0/0 is up, line protocol is up > Hardware is PowerQUICC Serial > Backup interface Async65, failure delay 10 sec, secondary disable > delay 60 sec, > kickin load not set, kickout load not set > MTU 1500 bytes, BW 1544 Kbit, DLY 20000 usec, > reliability 255/255, txload 21/255, rxload 22/255 > Encapsulation FRAME-RELAY, loopback not set > Keepalive set (10 sec) > LMI enq sent 25752, LMI stat recvd 25752, LMI upd recvd 0, DTE LMI > up > LMI enq recvd 0, LMI stat sent 0, LMI upd sent 0 > LMI DLCI 1023 LMI type is CISCO frame relay DTE > Broadcast queue 0/64, broadcasts sent/dropped 179841/0, interface > broadcasts 166963 > Last input 00:00:00, output 00:00:00, output hang never > Last clearing of "show interface" counters 2d23h > Queueing strategy: fifo > Output queue 0/40, 851 drops; input queue 0/75, 0 drops > 5 minute input rate 137000 bits/sec, 124 packets/sec > 5 minute output rate 133000 bits/sec, 125 packets/sec > 21463756 packets input, 2759646235 bytes, 0 no buffer > Received 0 broadcasts, 0 runts, 0 giants, 0 throttles > 0 input errors, 0 CRC, 0 frame, 0 overrun, 0 ignored, 0 abort > 21591969 packets output, 2815036977 bytes, 0 underruns > 0 output errors, 0 collisions, 0 interface resets > 0 output buffer failures, 0 output buffers swapped out > 0 carrier transitions > DCD=up DSR=up DTR=up RTS=up CTS=up > > RNRTH# > > > This is with 12.2(3) code, as I mentioned before. During testing, if I > turned on FRF, the Queueing strategy would change to dual FIFO. Without > FRF, it remains as a single FIFO queue. > > John > > >>> "Steven A. Ridder" 1/28/02 3:23:32 PM > >>> > I had my weekly meeting with Cisco, and according to them, it does. > Now I'm > going to have to do it for myself to see. I'll let you know. > ""John Neiberger"" wrote in message > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > I don't think this is entirely true, but it might depend on the > software > > release. We're using 12.2(3) and you definitely have to turn on FRF > to > > get the dual FIFO queue; FRTS alone doesn't do it. We have several > > routers using FRTS with no fragmentation and they only have a single > > FIFO queue. When I did some testing with this, adding FRF created > the > > dual FIFO queue but then our voice calls sounded worse, even though > we > > weren't actually fragmenting packets! > > > > Weird. Oh well, we've canned our VoIP project anyway. At the > moment > > it just isn't feasible, and no, it doesn't have a feasible > successor, > > either. :-) > > > > John > > > > >>> "Steven A. Ridder" 1/28/02 2:20:01 PM > > >>> > > Fragmenting above a serialization problematic size doesn't create > the > > dual-FIFO queue as certain CCO pages say. It's the frame-relay > > traffic-shaping command that does. > > ""Steven A. Ridder"" wrote in message > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > It seems way off. You don't frag a packet above the MTU. As for > > the > > subnet > > > mask as an IP, I can't imagine the router taking it. Why can't he > > put the > > > real IP in there? It's been a while since I've seen a customer do > > FRF.11 > > C, > > > though. I'd do his config right and also add the map classes to > > both > > > routers. Furthermore, unless he has about 60 or so calls going > > across, > > I'd > > > reduce the reserved BW from 720K to a more reasonable number. > > > > > > > > > ""Erich Kuehn"" wrote in message > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > > I have a customer that we provide frame-relay service to. He is > > trying > > to > > > do > > > > VoIP over Frame-Relay, while I have quite a bit of experience > with > > IP > > and > > > > Frame-Relay, once you put voice into it I get lost. > > > > > > > > His problem is that if his circuit goes down at location A, Once > > Loc B > > > comes > > > > back up (to my frame-relay switch) Loc A will not come back up. > The > > only > > > way > > > > to force Loc A back up is to shut the interface on the > frame-switch > > to > > > which > > > > Loc A connect and then open it back up. Strange I know. He is > > running > > > > similar routers at both locations (3660's on 12.2xt code) and > the > > config > > > are > > > > nearly identical. With exception > > > > > > > > At Loc B under the serial subinterface he has > > > > > > > > frame-relay inte.5 255.255.255.252 > > > > > > > > Never seen this can anyone explain??? > > > > > > > > He also has this in his config at both Loc A and B > > > > > > > > Map-class Frame-relay VoIP_FR > > > > frame-relay fragment 1600 > > > > frame-relay ip rtp priotity 16384 16383 720 > > > > no frame-relay adaptive-shaping > > > > frame-relay fair-queue > > > > > > > > At Loc A he makes reference to the map-class under the serial > subif > > at > > Loc > > > B > > > > he does not. > > > > > > > > Anyone with some input?? > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > > > > > > > Erich Kuehn > > > > Network Engineer > > > > Backbone Communications Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=33515&t=32968 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
