QoS to limit bandwith to a particular app?

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by trbodsl@gmail.com, Feb 23, 2006.

  1. Guest

    We run Lotus Notes that replicates to another server at another
    location over a T1. I'm tyring to set up a policy that will say any
    traffic destined for this server will be given "Lower" priority. I
    don't care if this maxes out the link all day, as long as other data
    will be able to flow freely over the link and the replication data will
    take the back seat.

    We are already using CBWFQ on our network, so I belive I have to stick
    with that

    I made an access list:

    access-list 102 permit tcp any 10.90.3.91 0.0.0.0 range 1350 1352

    Then I defined a class-map:

    class-map NotesRepData
    match access-group 102


    Now I was going to put the class-map statement into our existing policy
    which looks similar to this:

    Poilcy-Map Voice
    Class VoicePayload
    Priority 880
    Class VoiceSignaling
    Priority 128
    Class class-default
    fair-queue

    Here's where my problem comes in.. I don't know what I should put in
    for my class here..

    Poilcy-Map Voice
    Class VoicePayload
    Priority 880
    Class VoiceSignaling
    Priority 128
    >> Class NotesRepData
    >> <??> Bandwidth x or Priority X?

    Class class-default
    fair-queue

    >From what I can see this will allocate/guarantee bandwidth for the

    specific application, but what I really want to do is is just make this
    data take a back seat. Do I need to define a traffic class that
    encompases all traffic BUT this traffic?

    Something like this:
    (i.e. access-list 102 deny tcp any host 10.90.3.91 range 1350 1352
    access-list 102 permit ip any any)

    Then define a policy map:

    Poilcy-Map Voice
    Class VoicePayload
    Priority 880
    Class VoiceSignaling
    Priority 128
    Class NotesRepData
    Bandwidth percent 100
    Class class-default
    fair-queue


    This looks to me like Voice Traffic would still get priority, then
    other data would get 100 percent of the remaining bandwidth, then
    replication data would get whatever is left over.

    I tried setting up priority-lists and priority-groups, but it told me
    that CBWFQ is in use.

    Any input is appreciated!

    Thanks,
    -DZ
     
    , Feb 23, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Guest

    You could use Instead priority-list i found it easier

    for example:
    priority-list 1 protocol ip low tcp 1350
    priority-list 1 protocol ip low tcp 1352

    interface serial0/0 (or whatever is your T1)
    priority-group 1

    I hope that's help.
     
    , Feb 26, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Guest

    How about doing this:

    Create a class map such as:

    class map not_Lotus
    match not access-group 102


    With CBWFQ you should not reserve more than 75% of the bandwidth.
    Therefore 880 Kbps + 128 Kbps = 65% of the T1


    Poilcy-Map Voice
    Class VoicePayload
    Priority 880
    Class VoiceSignaling
    Priority 128
    Class Not_Lotus
    Bandwidth percent 10
    Class class-default
    fair-queue
     
    , Feb 28, 2006
    #3
  4. Charlie Root Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > How about doing this:
    >
    > Create a class map such as:
    >
    > class map not_Lotus
    > match not access-group 102
    >
    >
    > With CBWFQ you should not reserve more than 75% of the bandwidth.
    > Therefore 880 Kbps + 128 Kbps = 65% of the T1
    >
    >
    > Poilcy-Map Voice
    > Class VoicePayload
    > Priority 880
    > Class VoiceSignaling
    > Priority 128


    while you can configure several classes for priority queue, they will
    actually all end-up in the same queue:

    CE8#sh policy-map in se1/0 ou
    Serial1/0

    Service-policy output: LAB-WAN-OUT-01

    Class-map: VOICE (match-any)
    [...]
    Queueing
    Strict Priority
    Output Queue: Conversation 264
    [...]

    Class-map: VOICE_CLASSIFY (match-all)
    [...]
    Queueing
    Strict Priority
    Output Queue: Conversation 264


    Notice conversation ID. So it's just the same as you'd have assigned both
    voicepayload and signalling to the same class. Besides, having 65% of the
    line speed for priority queue will most likely leave other traffic no chance
    to pass through because router will unconditionally serve priority queue as
    long as there is traffic. Normally you shouldn't allocate above 20-30% for
    priority queue.

    Back to your original question, with CBWFQ 'priority queue' (LLQ, strict
    priority) always get absolute service priority, that is this queue is served
    as long as there are packets. When priority queue becomes empty all other
    queues are served in round-robin fashion and in each round number of bytes
    served from a queue (class) depends on configured 'bandwidth' parameter, but
    there is no priority difference between non-LLQ classes, i.e. they're equal.
    What you can do with your Lotus replication is to set upper limit allowed
    for this traffic. For this you need dedicated class (as you have described),
    then used WRED and 'police' or 'shape' for this class within policy-map, for
    example:

    Poilcy-Map Voice
    ....
    Class NotesRepData
    police rate percent 10 conform-action transmit exceed-action drop
    violate-action drop
    ! or comment out above line and uncomment following:
    ! shape average percent 10
    random-detect

    Also, remember that QoS is activated only when interface TX-ring becomes
    full, i.e. only if there is congestion.

    Kind regards,
    iLya
     
    Charlie Root, Mar 1, 2006
    #4
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Eric

    cisco 2950 limit bandwith

    Eric, May 10, 2006, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    934
  2. sali

    cisco805 bandwith limit

    sali, Nov 10, 2006, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    432
  3. Replies:
    2
    Views:
    620
    brickwalls19
    Jun 1, 2007
  4. guimev

    limit bandwith

    guimev, Apr 7, 2008, in forum: Cisco
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    423
    guimev
    Apr 7, 2008
  5. Rudi Hassauer

    limit bandwith in a LAN

    Rudi Hassauer, Nov 3, 2008, in forum: Wireless Networking
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    479
    Rudi Hassauer
    Nov 6, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page