I have rephrased my question slightly to highlight my dilemma which
involves whether or not to configure fragmentation on all PVCs or only one
out of three.
*Given below detail:*
HQ - SA - 64Kbps (DLCI 100) - Data & Voice
HQ - SB - 128Kbps (DLCI 200) - Data Only
HQ - SC - 64Kbps (DLCI 300) - Data Only
HQ - 256Kbps <--- Aggregate WAN
SA - 64Kbps
SB - 128Kbps
SC - 64Kbps
3xG729 between HQ-SA
*Question: Configure FRF.12 with 10-ms delay for voice traffic.*
[1] According to Table 3-1 Recommended Fragment Sizes, CIR, and Bc Values
for Slow-Speed Frame Relay Links, it should be safe
to use PVC speed as a reference point to calcualte "Maximum Fragment Size
(for 10-ms Delay)". (As opposed to a physical
interface's speed.) -
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/solutions/Enterprise/WAN_and_MAN/QoS_SRND/WANQoS.html#wp106984
[2] Should I perform the fragmentation on DLCI 200 & DLCI 300 or not? I
think it is reasonable to assume that since all of
these PVCs will share the same physical interface, fragmenting only for
large frame in DLCI 100 is not enough, therefore I
think it is necessary to also fragment DLCI 200 & DLCI 300.
[For reference, under section FRF.12 on this link, it is stated -
http://www.cisco.com/en/US/tech/tk652/tk698/technologies_configuration_example09186a0080094af9.shtml
"...Any other PVCs that share the same physical interface need to configure
the fragmentation to the size used by the voice PVC..."]
*If I have to bet, should I bet on performing fragmentation on all PVCs or
only perform fragmentation on HQ-SA's PVC?*
*Sample configuration below:*
Class-map match-any signal
match ip dscp cs3
Class-map match-any voice
match ip dscp ef
policy-map LLQ
class voice
priority 48
class signal
bandwidth 8
class-default
fair-queue
policy-map SHAPE-SA
class class-default
shape average 64000
service-policy LLQ-SA
policy-map SHAPE-SB
class class-default
shape average 128000
fair-queue
policy-map SHAPE-SC
class class-default
shape average 64000
fair-queue
map-class frame-relay HQ-SA
frame-relay fragment 80
service-policy output SHAPE-SA
map-class frame-relay HQ-SB
frame-relay fragment 160
service-policy output SHAPE-SB
map-class frame-relay HQ-SC
frame-relay fragment 80
service-policy output SHAPE-SC
interface serial 0/0
encapsulation frame-relay
interface serial 0/0.1 point-to-point
ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
frame-relay interface-dlci 100
class HQ-SA
interface serial 0/0.2 point-to-point
ip address 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
frame-relay interface-dlci 200
class HQ-SB
interface serial 0/0.3 point-to-point
ip address 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0
frame-relay interface-dlci 300
class HQ-SC
Regards,
--Somphol.
On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Somphol Boonjing wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Can anyone help confirm my understanding on this topic?
>
> My observation is that Per VC fragmentation, while it can be configured as
> when in the example below, is not very useful if not configured for all of
> the existing PVC that shared the same physical interface, isn't it?
>
> With the example below, only one of the VC (DLCI 100) is configured for
> fragmentation while the rest of the VCs (DLCI 200 & DCLI 300) that shared
> the same physical interface are not, then potentially outgoing fragmented
> frames from DLCI 100 could be waiting in queue while a fragmented large
> data frames from DLCI 200/DLCI 300 is being sent out.
>
> Am I correct?
>
>
> (REF:
> http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios-xml/ios/wan_frly/configuration/12-4t/wan-mqc-fr-tfshp.html#GUID-BAC1F514-EBD4-48FF-87AB-41F2BF86463E
> )
>
> Class-map voice
>
>
> match ip dscp ef
>
> policy-map llq
> class voice
> priority 32
>
> policy-map shape-policy-map
> class class-default
> shape average 64000
> shape adaptive 32000
> service-policy llq
>
> map-class frame-relay shape-map-class
> frame-relay fragment 80
> service-policy output shape-policy-map
>
> interface serial 0/0
> encapsulation frame-relay
>
> interface serial 0/0.1 point-to-point
> ip address 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
> frame-relay interface-dlci 100
> class shape-map-class
>
>
>
> interface serial 0/0.2 point-to-point
>
>
> ip address 192.168.2.1 255.255.255.0
> frame-relay interface-dlci 200
>
> interface serial 0/0.3 point-to-point
>
>
> ip address 192.168.3.1 255.255.255.0
> frame-relay interface-dlci 300
>
>
> Regards,
> --Somphol
>
>
>
___
For more information regarding industry leading CCIE Lab training, please visit
www.ipexpert.com
Are you a CCNP or CCIE and looking for a job? Check out
www.PlatinumPlacement.com
