<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.blogger.com/styles/atom.css" type="text/css"?><feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom' xmlns:openSearch='http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/'><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post4926793287947992678..comments</id><updated>2009-11-11T10:11:44.745+01:00</updated><title type='text'>Comments on Cisco IOS hints and tricks: Challenge: CB-WFQ Bandwidth+Police behavior</title><link rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#feed' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/feeds/4926793287947992678/comments/default'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html'/><author><name>Ivan Pepelnjak</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/13457151406311272386</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><generator version='7.00' uri='http://www.blogger.com'>Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>11</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>25</openSearch:itemsPerPage><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4390074967353460926</id><published>2009-11-11T10:11:45.186+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-11T10:11:45.186+01:00</updated><title type='text'>FYI :) ttcp is also available on Cisco IOS routers...</title><content type='html'>FYI :) ttcp is also available on Cisco IOS routers as a hidden command and can be setup as either the sender or receiver.</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/4390074967353460926'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/4390074967353460926'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257930705186#c4390074967353460926' title=''/><author><name>Masood Ahmad Shah</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-6608723620164265001</id><published>2009-11-10T10:34:02.658+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-10T10:34:02.658+01:00</updated><title type='text'>A single TTCP session is running on port 5001 will...</title><content type='html'>A single TTCP session is running on port 5001 will be allowed upto 100% from 256kbps bw as there is no congestion. &lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt;A single TTCP session is running on port 5002, this will get up to 50% of 256kps bw standard. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;One thing I think is missing from the previous comments is that there is no command regarding maximum BW available.. And by default 25% will be left available for the default class!!&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Three parallel TTCP sessions are running on ports 5001, 5002 and 5003.  &lt;br /&gt;5001 ~ guaranteed 50% of 75% of 256kps&lt;br /&gt;5002 ~ no more than 50% of 256kbps. &lt;br /&gt;5003 ~ guaranteed 25%</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/6608723620164265001'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/6608723620164265001'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257845642658#c6608723620164265001' title=''/><author><name>lee Wilson</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-8411737198121575908</id><published>2009-11-09T15:19:57.322+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-09T15:19:57.322+01:00</updated><title type='text'>Sure. You can run one TTCP session on each line (c...</title><content type='html'>Sure. You can run one TTCP session on each line (console/VTY) and you can create as many VTY lines as needed on a router.</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/8411737198121575908'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/8411737198121575908'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257776397322#c8411737198121575908' title=''/><author><name>Ivan Pepelnjak</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-1161675115591795279</id><published>2009-11-09T12:59:23.030+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-09T12:59:23.030+01:00</updated><title type='text'>Is it possible to run multiple parallel TTCP sessi...</title><content type='html'>Is it possible to run multiple parallel TTCP sessions from one cisco router to another cisco router? :&amp;#39;(</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/1161675115591795279'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/1161675115591795279'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257767963030#c1161675115591795279' title=''/><author><name>Guest</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-8024429283991067202</id><published>2009-11-07T20:00:23.590+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-07T20:00:23.590+01:00</updated><title type='text'>1) ~100%. The router reserves some bw for routing,...</title><content type='html'>1) ~100%. The router reserves some bw for routing, etc.&lt;br /&gt;2) ~20%. The drops will cause the TCP session to under utilize it&amp;#39;s offered bw.&lt;br /&gt;3) The port 5001 session gets 50% and then the 5001 and 5002 share the remaning. So, 5001 gets ~75%, 5002 ges ~25% but 5003 won&amp;#39;t get any bw since it has lower priority than any configured class.</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/8024429283991067202'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/8024429283991067202'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257620423590#c8024429283991067202' title=''/><author><name>Eyal</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-3031169972424912880</id><published>2009-11-07T12:05:19.756+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-07T12:05:19.756+01:00</updated><title type='text'>Hehe i remember i've been running the same tests a...</title><content type='html'>Hehe i remember i&amp;#39;ve been running the same tests and got pretty much surprised by case (3) :) That result of classic WFQ scheduling is not something one would expect. What I learned from that day is that you should always assign some bandwidth value in case if you want any  guarantees - fair queue command in class-default makes sense only when used standalone.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The link i provided in my previous post demostrates how that stuff works in pre-HQF implementations.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Petr</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/3031169972424912880'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/3031169972424912880'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257591919756#c3031169972424912880' title=''/><author><name>Petr Lapukhov</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-2898099953701216374</id><published>2009-11-06T17:45:26.978+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-06T17:45:26.978+01:00</updated><title type='text'>1)  100%
2)  50%
3)  5001 - 75% (50% + 50% of rema...</title><content type='html'>1)  100%&lt;br /&gt;2)  50%&lt;br /&gt;3)  5001 - 75% (50% + 50% of remaining unallocated)&lt;br /&gt;     5002 - 12.5%&lt;br /&gt;     5003 - 12.5%</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/2898099953701216374'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/2898099953701216374'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257525926978#c2898099953701216374' title=''/><author><name>Bryan</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-6821905272415434147</id><published>2009-11-06T15:00:16.742+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-06T15:00:16.742+01:00</updated><title type='text'>Rephrasing what had already been stated:

1) Gaura...</title><content type='html'>Rephrasing what had already been stated:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1) Gauranteed 50% during congestion, can use up to 100%.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;2) Limited to 50% period.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;3) 5003 AND 5002 split the available remaining bandwidth after 5001 has been provided it&amp;#39;s gauranteed 50%.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;That&amp;#39;s what I would expect anyways.</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/6821905272415434147'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/6821905272415434147'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257516016742#c6821905272415434147' title=''/><author><name>Steve</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-8058459963438341094</id><published>2009-11-06T14:05:23.365+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-06T14:05:23.365+01:00</updated><title type='text'>I aggree with the posters above.
I think the bigge...</title><content type='html'>I aggree with the posters above.&lt;br /&gt;I think the biggest problem is the misconception of what each of these lines do.  To be clear:&lt;br /&gt;class P5001&lt;br /&gt;  bandwidth percent 50&lt;br /&gt;Guarantees 50 percent of the band width but does not restrict it to only 50 percent.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; class P5002&lt;br /&gt;   police rate percent 50&lt;br /&gt;     violate-action drop&lt;br /&gt;Restricts to no more than 50 percent of the bandwidth but does not guarantee any.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;So, basically, CB-WFQ does exactly what it is supposed to do with the configurations you&amp;#39;ve posted.</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/8058459963438341094'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/8058459963438341094'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257512723365#c8058459963438341094' title=''/><author><name>JasonS</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4477592801154696402</id><published>2009-11-06T09:47:59.706+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-06T09:47:59.706+01:00</updated><title type='text'>* A single TTCP session is running on port 5001.  ...</title><content type='html'>* A single TTCP session is running on port 5001.  &lt;br /&gt;100% from availabe bw.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;    * A single TTCP session is running on port 5002. How much bandwidth does it get?&lt;br /&gt;50% from 256 kbps&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;    * Three parallel TTCP sessions are running on ports 5001, 5002 and 5003. &lt;br /&gt;5001 ~ 50% to 100% from available bw.&lt;br /&gt;5002 ~ no more then 128kbps. most probably near by 0%&lt;br /&gt;5003 ~ most probably near by 0%</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/4477592801154696402'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/4477592801154696402'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257497279706#c4477592801154696402' title=''/><author><name>Vaidotas</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-6910499195794396843</id><published>2009-11-06T09:21:31.030+01:00</published><updated>2009-11-06T09:21:31.030+01:00</updated><title type='text'>* A single TTCP session is running on port 5001. H...</title><content type='html'>* A single TTCP session is running on port 5001. How much bandwidth does it get? ~100%&lt;br /&gt;    * A single TTCP session is running on port 5002. How much bandwidth does it get? 50%&lt;br /&gt;    * Three parallel TTCP sessions are running on ports 5001, 5002 and 5003. How much bandwidth does each session get?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;5001 - 4x%&lt;br /&gt;5002 - 4x%&lt;br /&gt;5003 - ~5%</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/6910499195794396843'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/4926793287947992678/comments/default/6910499195794396843'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html?showComment=1257495691030#c6910499195794396843' title=''/><author><name>Anonymous</name><email>noreply@blogger.com</email></author><thr:in-reply-to xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0' href='http://blog.ioshints.info/2009/11/challenge-cb-wfq-bandwidthpolice.html' ref='tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23021255.post-4926793287947992678' source='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/23021255/posts/default/4926793287947992678' type='text/html'/></entry></feed>