I've implemented a shaper to limit traffic to 1Mbps, but it doesn't seem to be working. Below I can see that 1368000 and later 2912000 bps of traffic is going through the interface but the shaper is not activating. The config is at the bottom, Can anyone see if I am doing anything wrong?
Router1#show policy-map interface fa0/1
Service-policy output: Outbound-Test
Class-map: class-default (match-any)
17392 packets, 10594590 bytes
30 second offered rate 1368000 bps, drop rate 0 bps
I know it's hard to see due to the formatting but there are no delayed packets recorded in either show output.
As for the Bc, it's recommended to be the CIR/100 for real time networks to have a burst interval of 10ms. I originally had this shaper at 2Mb and had the same results (More than 2Mb of traffic, but the shaper did not activate).
I'm not sure what you mean by Max Packet (MTU?), but I don't think it would be the issue since I had the same behavior at 2Mbps.
I'll double check the output rate state when I get to do some testing tomorrow, good idea.
I'm using a Cisco 2811 that is running, SP Services 12.4(3i). I plan on changing the IOS to Advanced IP Services tomorrow.
As for the "max-reserved-bandwidth 100", my customer wants to be able to do CBFWQ for the entire bandwidth of the circuit (2Mbps). I know this isn't best practice and so does he, but it's his network so his call.
Yes, the whitespace compression is a problem, so for
- 0 72 9070 0 0 no
- 0 109 14642 0 0 no
what's the non-zero values counting?
Yes, generally smaller Tc are better for traffic like VoIP, but to get your Bc to match 1500 bytes would only require Tc to be 12ms for 1 Mbps (I think). Unlikely the extra 2ms, alone, would be a problem. (Plus so far you're only shaping, that alone isn't going to do much for real time traffic, although it provides WFQ[?].)
Without knowing your actual 2 Mbps parameters, can't say whether your Bc was too small. (Again, not positive this is an issue.) MTU is maximum transmission unit, i.e. largest packet media can tranmit. Standard Ethernet's is about 1500.
If there's a downstream limitation of 2 Mbps, why shaping for 1 Mbps?
I would be surprised changing the feature set would make a difference. (Although it wouldn't be the first time I've been surprised.) Changing the release, might be something you want to try. 3i is from 11/7. The latest of those is 3j, from 12/7. You might consider something that's current with many patches, e.g. 18e (4/9).
You don't need to use "max-reserved-bandwidth 100" to use all possible bandwidth, it has more to do with how much bandwidth you can define (reserve) for non-class-default classes, but doesn't cap them (excluding LLQ).
We are pleased to announce availability of Beta software for 16.6.3.
16.6.3 will be the second rebuild on the 16.6 release train targeted
towards Catalyst 9500/9400/9300/3850/3650 switching platforms. We are
looking for early feedback from customers befor...
Introduction Featured Speakers Luis Espejel is the Telecommunications
Manager of IENova, an Oil & Gas company. Currently he works with Cisco
IOS® and Cisco IOS XE platforms, and NX to some extent. He has also
worked as a Senior Engineer with the Routing P...
In this session you can learn more about Layer 3 multicast and the best
practices to identify possible threats and take security measures. It
provides an overview of basic multicast, the best security practices for
use of this technology, and recommendati...