priority-list functionality on a tunnel interface

Discussion in 'Cisco' started by John Caruso, Dec 22, 2004.

  1. John Caruso

    John Caruso Guest

    I'd like to implement a simple priority-based queueing scheme on a GRE
    tunnel (e.g. making all telnet traffic higher priority than any other
    traffic), but unfortunately GRE tunnels don't allow the use of priority-list/
    priority-group. So: what's the simplest alternative to achieve the same
    thing? I.e., approaching the level of simplicity of priority-list. I've
    browsed through the Cisco QoS documentation and I can see a few ways to
    approach this, but I'm looking for the most direct way--the tree that's
    obscured by the forest of QoS documentation, you might say.

    A short config snippet would be much appreciated.

    - John
     
    John Caruso, Dec 22, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. John Caruso

    John Caruso Guest

    I should have said that I *can't* see any way to do specifically what I'm
    talking about, since using class-map/policy-map, it looks like the main
    priority options are to set either the total Kbits/sec or the percentage
    of total bandwidth. I don't see any way to just do what priority-list
    does--i.e., put certain traffic into a high priority queue which will
    *always* be serviced first.

    Maybe what I want to do isn't possible for tunnel interfaces, and that's
    why there are no responses. If so, though, I'm pretty surprised that
    something that's so easy to do with priority queueing is so difficult to
    do with the more general QoS constructs.

    - John
     
    John Caruso, Dec 28, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. John Caruso

    DaveT Guest

    John,

    This should work for what you're looking for:
    class-map match-all telnet
    match protocol telnet
    !
    !
    policy-map tunnel-child
    class telnet
    priority 290
    policy-map tunnel-parent
    class class-default
    shape average 300000
    service-policy tunnel-child

    interface Tunnel10
    ip address 1.1.1.1 255.255.255.0
    service-policy output tunnel-parent
    tunnel source 2.2.2.2
    tunnel destination 3.3.3.3



    Basically you need to define the total amount of available bandwidth
    and tell it to shape to that in the "parent" policy map, and apply a
    child policy map to define how it should get broken up. Let me know if
    this works!
    -Dave
     
    DaveT, Dec 30, 2004
    #3
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.