05-29-2008 05:28 AM - edited 03-03-2019 10:09 PM
I want to configure LLQ so that one user get fix amount of bandwidth but still not able to configure it see the belwo mention configuration for LLQ
I want to configure LLQ on my Router which has 2 FE interface.
I want only specific application 10.1.4.3 always gets Bandwidth 74990 in either case. and one user get 8 kbps.
I configure the router with below mention command but still not able to get the desired result.
both users are able to get bandwidth in MB and no LLQ is working.
version 12.4
!
!
class-map match-all testclass2
match access-group 160
class-map match-all testclass
match access-group 150
!
!
policy-map testpolicy
class testclass
priority 8
class testclass2
priority 74990
!
!
interface FastEthernet0/0
bandwidth 8000
ip address 10.1.3.1 255.255.255.0
ip nat outside
ip virtual-reassembly
load-interval 30
duplex auto
speed auto
!
interface FastEthernet0/1
ip address 10.1.4.1 255.255.255.0
ip nat inside
ip virtual-reassembly
duplex auto
speed auto
!
ip classless
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2
!
ip nat inside source list 100 interface FastEthernet0/0 overload
!
access-list 150 permit ip host 10.1.4.3 any
access-list 160 permit ip host 10.1.4.5 any
Router-C#show policy-map interface fastEthernet 0/0
FastEthernet0/0
Service-policy output: testpolicy
Class-map: testclass (match-all)
91678 packets, 5680284 bytes
30 second offered rate 698000 bps, drop rate 0 bps
Match: access-group 150
Queueing
Strict Priority
Output Queue: Conversation 264
Bandwidth 8 (kbps) Burst 200 (Bytes)
(pkts matched/bytes matched) 9/612
(total drops/bytes drops) 0/0
Class-map: testclass2 (match-all)
144133 packets, 8696430 bytes
30 second offered rate 898000 bps, drop rate 0 bps
Match: access-group 160
Queueing
Strict Priority
Output Queue: Conversation 264
Bandwidth 5990 (kbps) Burst 149750 (Bytes)
(pkts matched/bytes matched) 22/1251
(total drops/bytes drops) 0/0
Class-map: class-default (match-any)
27 packets, 2235 bytes
30 second offered rate 0 bps, drop rate 0 bps
05-29-2008 05:52 AM
HI Wasim, [Pls Rate if HELPS]
class class-default and fair-queue are missing.
class-map match-all testclass2
match access-group 160
class-map match-all testclass
match access-group 150
!
!
policy-map testpolicy
class testclass
priority 8
class testclass2
priority 74990
class class-default
fair-queue
!
interface FastEthernet0/0
interface FastEthernet0/1
? Service-policy output testpolicy
The above was not applied in any of the Interface ?
Hope I am Informative.
Pls Rate if HELPS
Best Regards,
Guru Prasad R
05-29-2008 07:27 AM
Please see the updated configuation i have modified it but still not able to restrict the user,
Building configuration...
*May 29 15:25:44.768: %SYS-5-CONFIG_I: Configured from console by console
Current configuration : 1247 bytes
!
version 12.4
service timestamps debug datetime msec
service timestamps log datetime msec
no service password-encryption
!
hostname Router-C
!
boot-start-marker
boot-end-marker
!
!
no aaa new-model
!
resource policy
!
ip subnet-zero
!
!
ip cef
no ip dhcp use vrf connected
!
ip dhcp pool users
network 10.1.4.0 255.255.255.0
default-router 10.1.4.1
!
!
!
!
voice-card 0
no dspfarm
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
class-map match-all testclass2
match access-group 160
class-map match-all testclass
match access-group 150
!
!
policy-map testpolicy
class testclass
priority 8
class testclass2
priority 5990
class class-default
fair-queue
!
!
!
!
!
!
interface FastEthernet0/0
ip address 10.1.3.1 255.255.255.0
duplex auto
speed auto
service-policy output testpolicy
!
interface FastEthernet0/1
ip address 10.1.4.1 255.255.255.0
duplex auto
speed auto
!
ip classless
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2
!
!
ip http server
no ip http secure-server
ip nat inside source list 100 interface FastEthernet0/0 overload
!
access-list 150 permit ip host 10.1.4.3 any
access-list 160 permit ip host 10.1.4.5 any
!
!
!
!
control-plane
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
line con 0
line aux 0
line vty 0 4
login
!
scheduler allocate 20000 1000
!
end
Router-C#
Router-C#sh run
Building configuration...
Current configuration : 1247 bytes
!
version 12.4
service timestamps debug datetime msec
service timestamps log datetime msec
no service password-encryption
!
hostname Router-C
!
boot-start-marker
boot-end-marker
!
!
no aaa new-model
!
resource policy
!
ip subnet-zero
!
!
ip cef
no ip dhcp use vrf connected
!
ip dhcp pool users
network 10.1.4.0 255.255.255.0
default-router 10.1.4.1
!
!
!
!
voice-card 0
no dspfarm
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
class-map match-all testclass2
match access-group 160
class-map match-all testclass
match access-group 150
!
!
policy-map testpolicy
class testclass
priority 8
class testclass2
priority 5990
class class-default
fair-queue
!
!
!
!
!
!
interface FastEthernet0/0
ip address 10.1.3.1 255.255.255.0
duplex auto
speed auto
service-policy output testpolicy
!
interface FastEthernet0/1
ip address 10.1.4.1 255.255.255.0
duplex auto
speed auto
!
ip classless
ip route 0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0 10.1.3.2
!
!
ip http server
no ip http secure-server
ip nat inside source list 100 interface FastEthernet0/0 overload
!
access-list 150 permit ip host 10.1.4.3 any
access-list 160 permit ip host 10.1.4.5 any
!
!
!
!
control-plane
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
line con 0
line aux 0
line vty 0 4
login
!
scheduler allocate 20000 1000
!
end
I m trying to restrict the user to bandwidth 74990 but still failling user is able to download in MB
05-29-2008 01:48 PM
can anyone help me out
05-29-2008 05:05 PM
Recently I stumbled across Cisco LLQ documentation that the implicit policer only rate limits when there's interface congestion. The simple solution would be to add a police statement within the LLQ class so the class will never exceed its allocated bandwidth regardless of whether other traffic causes interface congestion. Something like:
policy-map testpolicy
class testclass
priority 8
police 8000
class testclass2
priority 74990
police 74990000
05-29-2008 09:55 PM
Hi Wasiim,
As said by Joseph, please remember that QoS queuing policies(not even LLQ) never kicks in if you don't have congestion. If your bandwidth utilization is low, then never expect any participation of QoS.
Regards...
-Ashok.
05-30-2008 12:33 AM
Hi,
Totally agree with Joseph and Ashok. The action of policing with LLQ depends upon if there is congestion > Policing will only be done if congestion occurs - with no congestion if the bandwidth required is more than the priority it won't be policed - but the extra packets will not be moved from the tail to the head of the queue (prioritized) like the conforming bandwidth, meaning that only the conforming bandwidth is prioritized and moved from the tail to the head of queue regardless there is congestion or not - implying that the prioritization is what is always policed and not the packet flow.
BR,
Mohammed Mahmoud.
05-30-2008 02:56 AM
thanks for the useful information. few more questions, I will have 6 MB bandwidth on my internet rotuer, I want that only specific traffic of video conferenceing server always get 386 KBps bandwidth.
will that above mention configuration will in live enviroment.
I have vsat link, which is terminate on Gigabit ethernet interface, is there any need to change the bandwidth on physical interface which is 1000 Mbps to actually bandwidth of 6 MB or leave it as it is
05-30-2008 06:16 AM
Hi wasim,
Changing the bandwidth command will not change the actual bandwidth that ISP has provided.It's hard to make the gigabit interface to get congestion. If you want to restrict the bandwidth all the time then policing is good way to go. Joseph provided a good one.
HTH
Thot
05-30-2008 07:06 AM
If you want to provide a minimum guarantee of bandwidth for some traffic, that can be accomplished by the bandwidth statement within a CBWFQ's class. If you want to limit the bandwidth within the CBWFQ class, then you want to shape or police it.
Whether or not to manage your gig interface that you know will be reduced to 6 Mbps depends on whether you expect traffic above 6 Mbps to create quality issues and whether you can manage such a situation better. (Usually I find the answer is yes to both questions. In your case, you might benefit from something as simple as a 6 Mbps shaper on the gig interface leading to the vsat link.)
05-30-2008 09:37 AM
Thanks for the reply, you mean to say there is no need to change anything on gig interface.
I have to make the policy and reserve the bandwidth and apply that policy on the gig interface. nothing to change not even bandwidth on the interface.
class-map match-all testclass2
match access-group 160
!
class testclass2
priority 386
class class-default
fair-queue
interface gig0/0
ip address 10.1.3.1 255.255.255.0
duplex auto
speed auto
service-policy output testpolicy
access-list 160 permit ip host 10.1.4.5 any
will that confiugration give 368 BW to this source in any case, and rest of the traffic treated as normal.
I will just apply this policy on interface nothing else is required on interface.
05-30-2008 01:59 PM
No, if you're going to apply any policy at all, and you know the bandwidth is constricted downstream, then you should shape for that restriction.
e.g.
(Something like)
class-map match-all testclass2
match access-group 160
!
policy-map testpolicy
class testclass2
priority 386
class class-default
fair-queue
policy-map vsat-shaper
class class-default
shape 6000000
service-policy testpolicy
interface gig0/0
ip address 10.1.3.1 255.255.255.0
duplex auto
speed auto
service-policy output vsat-shaper
access-list 160 permit ip host 10.1.4.5 any
The above will guarantee your host at 10.1.4.5 with at least 368 Kbps of bandwidth, with priority queueing. All other traffic will FQ all other available bandwidth, up to 6 Mbps.
05-30-2008 09:45 AM
Hi,
Correct me if I'm missing something over here:
1. I dont see any Service-Policy command on either of the interface
2. If you are assigning more than 1 LLQ in a given Policy-Map, I guess the Router will combine the LLQ and make it one.
If I were you, I would have given the 8kbps traffic LLQ and the 74990 kbps traffic CBWFQ so that former one would get guaranteed bandwith.
HTH,
Please rate all helpful posts
Kind Regards,
Wilson Samuel
05-30-2008 11:13 AM
If u see above I have applied the service policy on interface gig 0/0.
Discover and save your favorite ideas. Come back to expert answers, step-by-step guides, recent topics, and more.
New here? Get started with these tips. How to use Community New member guide