IPV6 QoS Low Latency Queuing for voice support on routers

Unanswered Question
Apr 30th, 2012

                   Hi, with IPV4 you use CBWFQ with a Priority queue for voice (marked EF) traffic. However priority queuing is not supported for IPV6 traffic on routers such as the G2's (29xx, 39xx), so what are the alternative LLQ queuing mechanisms for an outbound QoS policy to give low latency? Seaching CCO I can find nothing on this subject.

Thanks

Mick Russell

I have this problem too.
0 votes
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Average Rating: 0 (0 ratings)
dancicioiu Mon, 04/30/2012 - 04:23

Hi Russell,

Do you have any document/link that states the G2 does not support queuing for IPv6 traffic ? On the data sheet is not mentioned something like this

http://www.cisco.com/en/US/prod/collateral/routers/ps10536/data_sheet_c78_553924.html

Did you try :

class-map ipv6-voice

  match protocol ipv6

  match dscp ef

policy-map LLQ

    class ipv6-voice

         priority 25

Dan

mrrussell Tue, 05/01/2012 - 04:12

Dan, yes I did see the use of classifying ipv6 traffic, but thought this would not work with a priority queue. I have just tried it and it does work. So now I have two priority queues in my policy-map, one for IPV4 and one for IPV6.

class-map match-all ipv6-voice

match protocol ipv6

match dscp ef

class-map match-any ce_ef_output

Thanks

Mick

match ip dscp cs5 ef

!

Policy outbound

Description QoS policy for 5 VLANS  42.5 Mbit/s per access cdr 42.5 - 12 %EF -layer 1 Kbit/s EF 3079 AF 7528 DE 3346

! - 90% ipv4 10% ipv6

class ce_ef_output

  police 3550500 27000 27000 conform-action set-dscp-transmit EF exceed-action set-dscp-transmit EF violate-action drop

  priority 3550

class ipv6-voice

  priority 394

  police 394500 3000 3000 conform-action set-dscp-transmit EF exceed-action set-dscp-transmit EF violate-action drop

!

class ce_af4_output

bandwidth 7865

etc



Actions

Login or Register to take actions

This Discussion

Posted April 30, 2012 at 2:49 AM
Stats:
Replies:2 Avg. Rating:
Views:784 Votes:0
Shares:0

Related Content

Discussions Leaderboard