The current release of Cisco CallManager includes the ability to configure the CoS and ToS values for all VoIP control and management traffic from CallManager, the IP phones, H.323, Skinny Protocol, and MGCP gateways. With this user-configurable classification, network element access lists are no longer required to mark VoIP control traffic.
In the callmanager service parameters you 've got :
IpPrecedence : Used by anyone who configures streaming, phones, media applications, etc. Cisco strongly recommends that this parameter never be changed.
IpTosCm2Cm : Controls class of service of IP traffic and signals between Cisco CallManager to Cisco CallManager. Note: The following list shows that the valid value for IpTosCm2Cm is between 0 and 7 and is represented as follows: 0 = routine 1 = priority 2 = immediate 3 = flash 4 = flashOver 5 = critical 6 = internet 7 = network
IpTosCm2Dvce : Controls class of service of IP traffic and signals between Cisco CallManager to device. Controls class of service of IP traffic and signals between Cisco CallManager to Cisco CallManager. Note: The following list shows the valid value for IpTosCm2Dvce is between 0 and 7 and is represented as follows: 0 = routine 1 = priority 2 = immediate 3 = flash 4 = flashOver 5 = critical 6 = internet 7 = network
Regarding 2950 being a dumb one when it comes to QoS, you would probably like to have a look at the following document to see what can be done there
We have been following the QoS SRND and read the paragraph you quote, however, we are unable to spot where CCM sets a COS value. As you point out, you can set the TOS value.
We have IpTosCm2Cm/IpTosCm2Dvce set at 3 and 3 for 'flash' control traffic. We are not running Auto Attendant, so no voice goes to the CCMs. However, without an ACL on the ingress port of the switch which converts the IP TOS to a L2 COS, it is no use setting the TOS. Also:
Q to Cisco: We have 'sniffed' the traffic from the CCM and it does not honour these settings. All traffic from the CCMs has no COS and TOS=0. Do we need to raise a TAC case?
If it did work, the 2950 policy map only allows alteration of DSCP. As you can't set an ACL to match on TOS, you can't convert TOS to DSCP to COS.
So, we could use reams of ACLs to convert to specific UDP/TCP ports to DSCP. And then set specific DSCP to COS mappings. This would enable differentiation of HTTP, etc traffic from Control traffic and set COS to 0 and 3 respectively. But it appears easy to misconfigure and overkill.
mls qos cos 3
mls qos cos override
on the CCM ports on the 2950 is easier but doesn't differentiate between HTTP and control traffic.
Q to Cisco: Can CCMs set the COS value as the Aug 2000 QoS SRND guide suggests or is the guide incorrect?
Q to Cisco: Does it matter if HTTP traffic to/from the CCMs is classified with the same COS=3 setting? Would it affect CCM operation as control packets aren't dropped and only very occaisionally will they have to wait (microseconds) for HTTP (or other non-control) packets to serialise?
Q: Is the 2950 not up to the job and should we go and buy 3550s instead ! :-<
SIP traces provide key information in troubleshooting SIP Trunks, SIP
endpoints and other SIP related issues. Even though these traces are in
clear text, these texts can be gibberish unless you understand fully
what they mean. This document attempts to br...
Please find the attached HTML document, download and open it on your PC.
This provides an easy to use form where you simply answer a few
questions and it will render the proper jabber-config.xml file for you
to copy/paste. There is built in logic to verif...
[toc:faq]CUCM Database Replication is an area in which Cisco customers
and partners have asked for more in-depth training in being able to
properly assess a replication problem and potentially resolve an issue
without involving TAC. This document discusse...