Qos to multiple sites

Unanswered Question
Jul 23rd, 2008

I have the following requirement.

1. Each site (no PVCs) will get shaped to 128k. This is based on ACLs.

2. Within each shape Voice is to be given priority.

My config is as follows

class-map match-any L_QOS_CLASS

match access-group name L_QOS_ACL

class-map match-any E_QOS_CLASS

match access-group name E_QOS_ACL

class-map match-all SAT_VOICE_CLASS

match ip dscp ef

match access-group name VOICE_ACL

policy-map SAT_QOS_POLICY

class SAT_VOICE_CLASS

priority percent 33

class class-default

fair-queue

policy-map SAT_SHAPE_POLICY

class L_QOS_CLASS

shape average 128000

service-policy SAT_QOS_POLICY

class E_QOS_CLASS

shape average 128000

service-policy SAT_QOS_POLICY

What I am seeing is that shaping is working as it's supposed to, however when I issue a 'sh policy-map int s2/1' I get no matches on Voip traffic.

What am I missing?

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
Loading.
lgijssel Wed, 07/23/2008 - 01:13

The policy might not match the actual traffic pattern. Check that your voice traffic indeed has dscp value EF (46) and not 40.

Also check the setup of your QoS domain; the links between switches should trust their respective qos markings. The marking will be removed (0) when this is mot the case.

When trusting cos on the inbound links, verify that the cos-dscp map is correct i.e. maps cos5 to dscp 46. Also make sure that voice is set over a tagged vlan. Change the trust to dscp otherwise.

regards,

Leo

paris2london Wed, 07/23/2008 - 01:34

Hi Leo

I have checked that the voice packets on the remote end have infact EF set, and just to make sure I have added an additional access-list VOICE_ACL which specify the IP address of the Voip phone, however still no matches.

lgijssel Wed, 07/23/2008 - 03:21

Your class map has an error:

class-map match-all SAT_VOICE_CLASS

match ip dscp ef

match access-group name VOICE_ACL

The match-clause should not be: match-all but: match-any.

regards,

Leo

paris2london Wed, 07/23/2008 - 12:03

Hi Leo

Thanks for that.

However I tried it and I still get the same result.

Any ideas?

Actions

This Discussion