I have an interesting scenario that I am working on putting together a solution for.
I have a metro Ethernet network with only a Gigabit backbone connection between 2 locations. I need to give a customer a 145Mbps circuit using a gige handoff on both ends, but do not want to give them the ability to use the full gig of course.
Now I know this is easily done with things like port channels and load balanced links, but the major factor in this situation is that there is a large amount of VoIP traffic being sent over the link(s).
I thought about doing some policy maps and traffic shaping down to 145mbps, but then I figured that the buffering of traffic when the customer is trying to exceed that 145mbps may cause issues with voip packets and latency.
Again, the issue with traditional load balancing with routing protocols is the possibility of packets arriving out of order etc.
I was looking toward a way to shape the traffic, as well as have all Voip traffic have priority and never be buffered, but if all traffic was voip, and the customer was trying to use say 150mpbs, then some would always be queue and then their would be latency?
Just wanted to further comment on the difference between what Giuseppe is suggesting and what I'm suggesting. Giuseppe's config would be the method of choice if the WAN was limited to 145 Mbps but had higher bandwidth edge handoffs. (e.g. Ethernet gig handoffs but OC-3 in between.) My config assumes the WAN is the gig you noted but you want to restrict a customer's "slice" of the bandwidth. If the latter, Giuseppe's config, although it places customer VoIP first within the shaper's control doesn't guarantee VoIP traffic not under control of the shaper, and if there is traffic outside of the shaper, would not really guarantee customer's VoIP perfomance. It very important to understand whether you desire to control all traffic limited by a downstream bottleneck or just the customer's traffic.
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 custome...