Shhh! The QoS Config Guide is long enough as it is - I don't want you two giving Cisco any ideas!
;-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "John Neiberger" To: Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 4:04 PM Subject: Re: Queuing question(s) again ! [7:56519] > Wouldn't that be an ABT? :-) > > John > > >>> "Priscilla Oppenheimer" 10/31/02 1:40:24 PM > >>> > I like that: "acronym-based technologies." ;-) > > Priscilla > > "B.J. Wilson" wrote: > > > > > Just about the last phrase 'The "priority" > > > command is not used with CBWFQ', > > > considering that I call LLQ within CBWFQ, is > > > it correct ? > > > > Well...you calling it "LLQ within CBWFQ" isn't Cisco canon, but > > your config > > below is a fine LLQ configuration. > > > > I've noticed (especially in my studies of QoS) that the only > > differentiator > > between acronym-based technologies (like LLQ and CBWFQ) is just > > the addition > > of one little command in an otherwise "old" config. > > > > BJ > > > > > > > > > > policy-map MyPolicy > > > class Voice > > > priority 200 > > > class Silver > > > bandwidth 200 > > > class class-default > > > random-detect > > > fair-queue Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=56628&t=56519 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
