<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Quick Notes on the 3560 Egress Queuing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/</link>
	<description>Helping you become a Cisco Certified Internetwork Expert</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 22:51:39 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Didier from  France</title>
		<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-13922</link>
		<dc:creator>Didier from  France</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 23 Nov 2008 09:58:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-13922</guid>
		<description>Hi Petr,

an another question please
if i enable q1 PQ (30% for example) but if there is no trafic for the PQ;
the bandwidth of other queues q2/q3/q4 is limited at 70% 
or the bandwidth reserved PQ can be used by the others queues?

i think, the answer will be goog for ingress queues too ?

Thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Petr,</p>
<p>an another question please<br />
if i enable q1 PQ (30% for example) but if there is no trafic for the PQ;<br />
the bandwidth of other queues q2/q3/q4 is limited at 70%<br />
or the bandwidth reserved PQ can be used by the others queues?</p>
<p>i think, the answer will be goog for ingress queues too ?</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Goyheneix Didier  CCIP France</title>
		<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-13655</link>
		<dc:creator>Goyheneix Didier  CCIP France</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:30:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-13655</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the explication "egress queues shared and shaped".

but for the ingress queues, i don't understand the notion of 2 queues when there is a priority queue.
Doc Cisco says, by default 90% q2 and 10% q1 whith a priority 10% for q2. 
if q2 is priority with 10%, why q2 is too 10% in the SRR process ?

Thanks you</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the explication &#8220;egress queues shared and shaped&#8221;.</p>
<p>but for the ingress queues, i don&#8217;t understand the notion of 2 queues when there is a priority queue.<br />
Doc Cisco says, by default 90% q2 and 10% q1 whith a priority 10% for q2.<br />
if q2 is priority with 10%, why q2 is too 10% in the SRR process ?</p>
<p>Thanks you</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Daniel</title>
		<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-9873</link>
		<dc:creator>Daniel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 18:49:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-9873</guid>
		<description>Hobbs: Your router platform could be the culprit. Like you, I got puzzling results at first when I used c3725 Routers. Then when I changed to the older C2600 routers, I was able to reproduce all of Petr's above scenarios. Also manually set all interfaces to full-duplex, especially when your the router interfaces are Ethernet (i.e have max speed of 10MBps).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hobbs: Your router platform could be the culprit. Like you, I got puzzling results at first when I used c3725 Routers. Then when I changed to the older C2600 routers, I was able to reproduce all of Petr&#8217;s above scenarios. Also manually set all interfaces to full-duplex, especially when your the router interfaces are Ethernet (i.e have max speed of 10MBps).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: hobbs</title>
		<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-9168</link>
		<dc:creator>hobbs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2008 16:35:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-9168</guid>
		<description>First, thanks for a wonderful explanation. I have followed this lab, and when I enable priority queuing in your second scenario, I get the same load distribution as in the first scenario. In other words, prec 5 is still being limited. I have verified that cos 5 maps to queue 1. Is there something else I am missing? I made sure to clear stats on R2 before testing. thanks</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First, thanks for a wonderful explanation. I have followed this lab, and when I enable priority queuing in your second scenario, I get the same load distribution as in the first scenario. In other words, prec 5 is still being limited. I have verified that cos 5 maps to queue 1. Is there something else I am missing? I made sure to clear stats on R2 before testing. thanks</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: SRR bandwidth calculation &#124; David Sudjiman</title>
		<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-6780</link>
		<dc:creator>SRR bandwidth calculation &#124; David Sudjiman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:31:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-6780</guid>
		<description>[...] you read this Quick Notes on the 3560 Egress Queuing  by Petr Lapukhov, this table will complete the picture to show you how calculation [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] you read this Quick Notes on the 3560 Egress Queuing  by Petr Lapukhov, this table will complete the picture to show you how calculation [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Petr Lapukhov, CCIE #16379</title>
		<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-6269</link>
		<dc:creator>Petr Lapukhov, CCIE #16379</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 2008 04:35:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-6269</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;To: Pavel Stefanov&lt;/i&gt;

Shaping is always active, no matter whether the interface is congested or not. Thus, it performs function similar to egress policing on the older 3550 models.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>To: Pavel Stefanov</i></p>
<p>Shaping is always active, no matter whether the interface is congested or not. Thus, it performs function similar to egress policing on the older 3550 models.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pavel Stefanov</title>
		<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-6190</link>
		<dc:creator>Pavel Stefanov</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Aug 2008 19:37:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-6190</guid>
		<description>Another great article! 

Just a quick question - when there is no congestion present on the interface, the srr-queue bandwidth shaped command would not limit traffic that matches a queue that is shaped, correct? 

Thank you!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Another great article! </p>
<p>Just a quick question - when there is no congestion present on the interface, the srr-queue bandwidth shaped command would not limit traffic that matches a queue that is shaped, correct? </p>
<p>Thank you!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Petr Lapukhov, CCIE #16379</title>
		<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-3721</link>
		<dc:creator>Petr Lapukhov, CCIE #16379</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2008 04:56:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-3721</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;To Jo&lt;/i&gt;

Sort of :) But version 5 diagrams will probably have extra pictures of medieval castles, dragons, knights and fairies :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>To Jo</i></p>
<p>Sort of <img src='http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> But version 5 diagrams will probably have extra pictures of medieval castles, dragons, knights and fairies <img src='http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Petr Lapukhov, CCIE #16379</title>
		<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-3720</link>
		<dc:creator>Petr Lapukhov, CCIE #16379</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jun 2008 04:51:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-3720</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;To Gianluca&lt;/i&gt;

Obviously, shared mode weight does not affect PQ behavior. Up until the moment when I first verified PQ functionality, I was sure that "shaped" weight does affect PQ sending rate. However, as you can see (and run a verification yourself just to be sure), shaped weight has no effect on PQ either. Actually, this is what they briefly mention in the DocCD:

"
When you configure this command [priority-queue out], the SRR weight and queue size ratios are affected because there is one fewer queue participating in SRR. This means that weight1 in the srr-queue bandwidth shape or the srr-queue bandwidth share command is ignored (not used in the ratio calculation).
"

I'll try to make another post on ingress queueing in policing in near future and investigate how ingress PQ actually works.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>To Gianluca</i></p>
<p>Obviously, shared mode weight does not affect PQ behavior. Up until the moment when I first verified PQ functionality, I was sure that &#8220;shaped&#8221; weight does affect PQ sending rate. However, as you can see (and run a verification yourself just to be sure), shaped weight has no effect on PQ either. Actually, this is what they briefly mention in the DocCD:</p>
<p>&#8221;<br />
When you configure this command [priority-queue out], the SRR weight and queue size ratios are affected because there is one fewer queue participating in SRR. This means that weight1 in the srr-queue bandwidth shape or the srr-queue bandwidth share command is ignored (not used in the ratio calculation).<br />
&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;ll try to make another post on ingress queueing in policing in near future and investigate how ingress PQ actually works.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gianluca</title>
		<link>http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-3699</link>
		<dc:creator>Gianluca</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Jun 2008 23:11:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.internetworkexpert.com/2008/06/26/quick-notes-on-the-3560-egress-queuing/#comment-3699</guid>
		<description>Hi Petr,

In the quick questions and answers section you say that it is not possible to restrict the PQ sending rate using “shaped” weight.

However in the CCIE Routing and Switching Exam Certification Guide (Third Edition, page 462) it is written that when the PQ still has many frames to send, but queues 2, 3, and 4 are empty, in shared mode the PQ would send at full line rate while in shaped mode the switch would simply not service the PQ part of the time so that its overall rate would be the bandwidth configured for that queue.
According to the book it looks like it is possible to limit the PQ sending rate configuring a shaped weight but your verification scenario demonstrates that it is not true.

Have I understood wrong what is written in the certification guide?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Petr,</p>
<p>In the quick questions and answers section you say that it is not possible to restrict the PQ sending rate using “shaped” weight.</p>
<p>However in the CCIE Routing and Switching Exam Certification Guide (Third Edition, page 462) it is written that when the PQ still has many frames to send, but queues 2, 3, and 4 are empty, in shared mode the PQ would send at full line rate while in shaped mode the switch would simply not service the PQ part of the time so that its overall rate would be the bandwidth configured for that queue.<br />
According to the book it looks like it is possible to limit the PQ sending rate configuring a shaped weight but your verification scenario demonstrates that it is not true.</p>
<p>Have I understood wrong what is written in the certification guide?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
