I had problems using qos-groups, although from its documentation what you've done, I believe, should be correct. You might also consider using the ToS instead.
Since you show the outbound policy on an Ethernet interface with a bandwidth statement of 512, your policy won't control bandwidth until there's interface congestion. You should probably shape to the actual outbound bandwidth. (Shaping appears to provide implicit FQ. Shaping alone might provide a noticable improvement.)
You're still going to have an issue for VPN bandwidth, inbound. That's very difficult to do well downstream.
Unclear what you're saying. If you're saying you not seeing any matches against the packets the first policy is marking, that I recall is the issue I've too seen with qos-groups, which is why I suggested using a ToS setting instead. I.e. use your inbound policy to tag with something like IP Predence 1 or DSCP CS1 and then match against that value.
Hi everyone, I would like to thank you in advance for any help you can provide a newcomer like myself!
Im studying the 100-105 book by Odom and am currently on the topic of Port security. I purchased a used 2960 and I'm trying to follow a...
While deploying a number of 18xx/2802/3802 model access points (APs), which run AP-COS as their operating platform. It can be observed on some occasions that while many of their access points were able to join the fabric WLC withou...
I am going to design and build an LAN network under a tunnel underground with long distance between the switches.
I will have 2 Catalyst switches and 8 Industrial IE3000, and they will be connected with fiber.
For now I am planning on use Layer-2 s...