Tyler, I would love to implement a policy similar to that one. Unfortunately, I don't believe you can have two tiers of shaping like that in a policy. Most of the two-tiered shaping solutions I have seen involve using a VRF to shape to the aggregate rate and then use a second VRF to shape to the site rate. This is to get around the three-tier policy limitations. With that said, if you have something like that configured and working, I would love to see the config and the "show policy-map interface" output. That is exactly the kind of policy I was originally looking to implement, but then I ran into those limitations. Thanks for the reply. Great idea in concept. If only we could implement. On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 9:02 AM, Tyler Haske <tyler.haske@gmail.com> wrote:
If you want to prevent a PE router from deciding which ingress packets to drop, the only plan is to send packets to spoke sites at or below the spoke line-rate. The only good way to do that is shaping on the hub router.
policy-map parent_shaper class class-default shape average 100000000 < --- 100Mbps parent shaper. service-policy site_shaper
policy-map site_shaper class t1_site shape average 1536000 service-policy qos_global class multilink_site shape average 3072000 service-policy qos_global class class-default service-policy qos_global
policy-map qos_global ... whatever you typically use here....
Tyler Haske
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Wes Tribble <westribble@gmail.com> wrote:
I have a question for the QOS gurus out there.
We are having some problems with packet loss for our smaller MPLS locations. This packet loss is due to the large speed differential on our Hub site(150mb/s) in comparison the the branch office locations(single T-1 to 4.5mb/s multilinks). This packet loss only seems to impact really bursty applications like our Web Proxy. I have been around and around with WindStream to give me some extra buffer or enable random early detection on the smaller interfaces in my MPLS network. So far they are unwilling to do a custom policy and none of their standard policies have enough buffer to handle the bursts. They do FIFO tail drop in every queue, so I can’t even choose a policy that has WRED implemented.