Hierarchical QoS on ASR 1004

Unanswered Question
Feb 1st, 2010

I'm stymied by hierachical QoS on the ASR 1004 platform and am hoping that someone can show me the light.

Currently, I have a successful configuration on the ISR 3845 and 2821 platform where I have multiple GRE tunnels each with their own outgoing service policy and all of which exit the same physical interface.  The physical interface is 1Gbps, but the CIR I have with the provider is 100Mbps, so I have a policy applied to the physical interface that shapes at 100Mbps and then calls another policy that prioritizes voice at 10Mbps with default getting 90Mbps.

Then each tunnel interface has an outgoing policy that shapes at the CIR subscribed to at the far end of the tunnel (typically 3, 5, or 10Mbps) and that calls another policy where the bandwidth for specific classes is allocated. 

All this works just fine.

Now, however, I'm trying move it all to the ASR platform.  The ASR doesn't support outgoing service policies on tunnel interfaces - at least now how I've got it configured.  TAC tells me that I should be able to do everything I need with a policy on the physical interface since I can make classes based on the tunnel destination address and that the ToS byte from an embedded packet is automatically copied to the outside packet.  I set up the classes and the policies, but when I try to apply it, I get the message "can not be attached to 3rd level policy with 3-level of hierarchy".

Any recommendations?

What I'm trying to accomplish is:

- each tunnel limited (shaped) to a specific bandwidth

- voice traffic prioritized within that tunnel's allocated bandwidth

- physical interface limited (shaped) to the aggregate bandwidths of all the tunnels

- voice traffic from all tunnels prioritized when exiting the physical interface

Thanks for any help.

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Overall Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
philblower Mon, 02/01/2010 - 09:43

Looks like I may be getting closer.  If I just drop the aggregate shaper and service policy altogether, then the class for each tunnel is permitting me to shape and call the next level service policy.  Since the shapers for each class still add up to less than the 100Mbps CIR to the provider, I should be good.


This Discussion