![]() When using service instances in IOS as above, the verification command has changed a bit, somewhat annoyingly. I don’t know why Junos makes it so difficult to view this kind of information. IOS still has much better verification than Junos. Note that you need to configure hierarchical-scheduler under the interface itself: darreno> show configuration interfaces ge-1/0/0 Now we create our traffic profiles and attach the above scheduler-map to it darreno> show configuration class-of-service traffic-control-profilesĪttach the profile to the interface under class-of-service: darreno> show configuration class-of-service interfaces Passing Mark: The passing mark for the CCIE-SECURITY-LAB exam is not publicly disclosed by Cisco.And Now, CCNA is updated as CCNA 200-301.0 CCIE LAB. This allows you to shape to a specific rate, attach a scheduler inside that profile, and attach that profile to an interface.įirst let’s create our schedulers and scheduler-map: darreno> show configuration class-of-service schedulersĭarreno> show configuration class-of-service scheduler-mapsįorwarding-class expedited-forwarding scheduler EF įorwarding-class best-effort scheduler BE H-QoS on Junos is done using a traffic-control profile. Police cir percent 30 conform-action transmit exceed-action dropĮach policy can then attach to an EVC outbound on a physical port: ME3600X#sh run int gi0/1 In IOS I create the child and parent policies. So I need to shape vlan 2000 to 20Mb, and inside that 20Mb ensure 30% is given to EF packets. ![]() And thus, we have set aside a handful of actual CCIE Practical Lab pods that qualified candidates can rent for a four-hour block to practice in and prepare for the CCIE Practical Exam. Not only do I want to shape their respective queues, I also want to give 30% priority bandwidth to each customer, inside each queue. We knew we needed to provide some structured access to allow candidates to adequately prepare. Customer A is paying for 20Mb while Customer B is paying for 70Mb. Here I have two customer circuits attached. Let’s take the following port diagram as an example: The bigggest problem with doing this is that it gets difficult to give QoS outbound back to the customer unless your hardware can do H-QoS. we can put 10 X 100Mb circuits onto a single gig link. In order not to waste precious revenue ports, these circuits are aggregated into a single physical gig port. Most core kit has a load of gig ports, some 10Gb ports and maybe 40Gb/100Gb ports. ‘Revenue ports’ as ISPs like to call them. In this post I’ll be using a Juniper MX5 and a Cisco ME3600X, both which allow me to do H-QoS on their gig ports. More so than any other type of QoS, H-QoS is very hardware specific. I’m going to be going over one particular use case for H-QoS in which I use on a daily basis. There are many different needs for H-QoS and may different ways to configure it. ![]() Brad Fleming from Kanren gave me remote access to a lab MX5 router in order to do the Junos section of this port for when I am very grateful!
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |