Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Cisco > available bandwidth

Reply
Thread Tools

available bandwidth

 
 
srp336@getcoactive.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2006
Thanks to everyone who responded to my recent posts regarding setting
up EIGRP unequal cost routing. The load balancing is looking pretty
good these days...

In doing some speed tests over these T1 lines in response to some
concerns we had here over throughput, I noticed something on one of the
interfaces. Under 'output queue', it shows 'available bandwidth' and a
number that's 75% of the stated bandwidth. Is this 75% figure standard?
Can it be adjusted?

My main concern is being able to fully explain to management how much
bandwidth we can expect to be getting through these T1s...

Thanks!

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
ciscodagama@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-01-2006
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> Thanks to everyone who responded to my recent posts regarding setting
> up EIGRP unequal cost routing. The load balancing is looking pretty
> good these days...
>
> In doing some speed tests over these T1 lines in response to some
> concerns we had here over throughput, I noticed something on one of the
> interfaces. Under 'output queue', it shows 'available bandwidth' and a
> number that's 75% of the stated bandwidth. Is this 75% figure standard?
> Can it be adjusted?


Yes, that is the default and it indicates that the maximum reservable
bandwidth on the interface. The reservation is done when QoS is
configured on the system. You can change that using the
"max-reserved-bandwidth" command under the interface.

> My main concern is being able to fully explain to management how much
> bandwidth we can expect to be getting through these T1s...


The idea with only allowing 75% of the bandwidth to be reservable by
default is to allow 25% for routing protocols and other such important
traffic. BTW since you are running EIGRP, you can also look into a
command that limits how much of the bandwidth EIGRP is allowed to use.
That command is "ip bandwidth-percent eigrp percent ".

Cisco da Gama
http://ciscostudy.blogspot.com

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
srp336@getcoactive.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2006
(E-Mail Removed) wrote:
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote:


> Yes, that is the default and it indicates that the maximum reservable
> bandwidth on the interface. The reservation is done when QoS is
> configured on the system. You can change that using the
> "max-reserved-bandwidth" command under the interface.


I see... I can understand setting aside some of the bandwidth for
overhead, but isn't 25% a little much? In case, that comes to about 600
kbit/s. The only routing protocol going over these T1s is EIGRP with a
handful of networks.

Are there any kind of guidelines to adjusting this? Would it be better
to use max-reserved-bandwidth, or ip bandwidth-percent eigrp?

Thanks!

 
Reply With Quote
 
ciscodagama@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2006
> > Yes, that is the default and it indicates that the maximum reservable
> > bandwidth on the interface. The reservation is done when QoS is
> > configured on the system. You can change that using the
> > "max-reserved-bandwidth" command under the interface.

>
> I see... I can understand setting aside some of the bandwidth for
> overhead, but isn't 25% a little much? In case, that comes to about 600
> kbit/s. The only routing protocol going over these T1s is EIGRP with a
> handful of networks.


Note that 75% number is just the max reservable bandwidth when you are
using QoS. It does not mean that only 75% of the bandwidth will be
used. If there is user traffic, it will use the all the bandwidth it
can if QoS is not configured. It is just that you cannot use QoS to
give bandwidth guarantees beyond 75% if the interface bandwidth unless
you increase the reservable bandwidth using the
"max-reserved-bandwidth" command.

> Are there any kind of guidelines to adjusting this? Would it be better
> to use max-reserved-bandwidth, or "ip bandwidth-percent eigrp" command?


By default, EIGRP will use no more than 50% of the link bandwidth. If
you have an unstable network where you think EIGRP is using too much of
your link bandwidth, you can limit that further using the "ip
bandwidth-percent eigrp" command to less than 50%. If the network is
stable, I would suggest just leaving that alone.

Cisco da Gama
http://ciscodagama.blogspot.com

 
Reply With Quote
 
srp336@getcoactive.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      03-02-2006
I see... there seems this ceiling at 75% of the bandwidth that we
can't seem to get through. I don't think I've ever configured any QoS
before. Could something be on by default?

The T1s in question are a full T1 and 14 channels of another one. I
expect the theorectical maximum bandwidth to be 2432 kbit/s (38
channels X 64 kbit/s/channel). The peak speed showing up on our router
stats is about 1800 kbit/s, about 75% (that was a location to location
backup at around 4am when the rest of the network was quiet). During
the day, we seem to get an average throughput of 1200 to 1400 kbit/s
in the tests that I've done. I don't see any points that seem to be
saturated.

Is the throughput we're getting reasonable for the bandwidth we have?

Thanks!

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
QoS and available Bandwidth JF Mezei Cisco 12 12-15-2010 06:32 AM
Dialup doesn't use available bandwidth Howard Heflin Computer Support 13 03-31-2007 04:24 PM
Regarding upload/download and available bandwidth vasavi Wireless Networking 4 12-13-2005 11:22 AM
Available Bandwidth Igor MamuziŠ Cisco 7 01-12-2005 09:26 AM
Re: Web page is not available - "The Web page you requested is not available offline. To view this page, click Connect" Natty Gur ASP .Net 0 06-06-2004 05:46 AM



Advertisments