This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
Advanced Qyeuing strategy - MDRR , WFQ , CBWFQ , LLQ - compress payloads - compress headers Bandwidth versus clock rate - bandwidth commands is what is reported to process on the router - bandwith tell the router that i have this much BW on this interface Latency (delay) - Propogation delay : speed of light in media - serialization delay : clock all bits onto the wire -processing delay : time spent for router to take inout ans move to output in terface -packetization delay : turn the data into packets -queuing dealy : variable value : time spent in the queue of the output interfac es
packet loss -common reason - tail drop - less common - input quesu due to cpu congestion - ignore - no buffer spacce on router - overrun - congested cpu cannot assign free buffer - frame error - CRC , runt , giant - effects of packet loss - WRED - Shaping / policing
VOIP Traffic (ex RTP) -constant bit rate -one way latency appx 150ms -one way jitter - vrattion within 30 ms - one way packet loss 1 % - up to 106 kbps per call - 150 bps & L2 over head per call gor control traffic - these are identical for vidro conferncing except it requires higher bandwidth
-tctp vs udp and icmp
per hop behavor dependent .for output queue .hold-queue in out .hard qos .software queue manipulation note: Cisco recommend not to use hardware queue coz its always depend on physica l interface bandwidth and cisco ios automatically tunes it QOS models .variable bit rate .adaptive flows .fragile flows .RSVP .class maps .policy maps .congestion avoidence -shaping / policing .cli .both quesus types consume memory chunks from buffer pools .classfication .Cisco works Input / output quue .video traffic .HW queue or transmit ring (TX-ring) typically smaller than software queue ans always FIFO -tx-ring .. there is a software queue and a hardware queue .Best effor -.for input queues .Auto qos .mangement and control plane traffic Qos implementation methods .limit .INterServ.DifferServ .link Efficeincy ================================ QOS Part 2 . always FIFO .MQC (modular qos comamnds)--invented for specially CBWFQ . one queue per interface .service-policy maps .congestion mangement .FIFO . the softwa re queue can be FIFO or FANCY Queuing. 75 packets by defau lt .bulk transfer ftp/http -interactive traffic ICA / RDP / telnet .aggressive flows .output hardware queue . Hardware queue .
classfication .congestion avoidance .1p you can have 8 differnet markings under 802.marking -congestion management .CLP bit .3 bit different bits used in the frame relay header for QOS .FECN .Very Complex .DiffServ Model -Network recognizes Different calsses and provides different level of qos.4 bit user Code field used to carry " class of service " COS marking 802.BECN .3 bit traffic class field .Cell Loss priority MPLS .Discard eligible bit ATM .link efficiency ISL trunk .formely called Experimental bits (for QOS in mpls) 8 bit TOS field in IP Header used for qos .DE .Baclward ECN .Forward explicit congestion nottification . .1q marking 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 binary 00 001 010 011 100 101 110 111 service level routinng priority immediate flash flash override critical internetwork control network control you can use marking between 0 to 5 5 cos is always voice traffic 6 & 7 are used by routing so never to use this marking Frame Realy .1Q .shaping / policing .3 bit priority field used to carry " class of service" of service " COSMarking 802.
EF (101110)-46 . 10 .01 .last 2 bits of TOS byte are for congestion notification Trust Boundary --. it me ans NO DROP.000000 .IP Precedence .101110 .the marking for voice traffic . high AF 11 is low drop then AF13 higher in interclasses hogher is better like af31 better than af13 but inner class lower is beetter like af11 is better than af13 .always trsut as close to device level.with this class . 3.big confusion point . & 4) . Assured Forarding AF classes PHB . 11 for low medium .Default PHB .with assured forwarding code points .first 3 high-order bits of the type of service byte in the ip header traffic c lass field CHART marking 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 binary 00 001 010 011 100 101 110 111 service level routinng priority immediate flash flash override critical internetwork control network control Cisco recommends to have atleast 6 to 11 classes with wos designing and implemen tations DSCP -. 2. the (11 the 5th an d 6th bit value ) will indicate HIGH DROP probability .Expedited Forwarding ( EF) . DSCP & PHBs ( Per hob behaviour) .101000 (40) EF PHB .new model of qos DSCP (Diffserv code point) .first 6 high-order bits of the TOS byte in the header .Class Slector .Assured Forwarding ( AF 1 .100110 ( AF43) -aaadd0 where d is drop probability .the drop probabilities .
Applications that use static TCP & UDP port nuimbers -..do we traust this marking or not .upgrades to the builtin definitions of protocols ..calssify and mark traffic as close as to the source .NBAR requires CEF .deep packet inspection can be done . EIGRP . tunnele d or encryption . non MPLS .qos classification and protocol discovery ( Analysis ) . NBAR ( Network based application recognition .there is also a 20bit flow label .qos calssificaiotn inside the MQC is our : famous : usage .packet definition language modules . .every network node can respond approproately.you can add your own protocols .pre-defined definitions in the ios and you can extend then using PDLMS.ideally..ALso .. QOS Groups . dialer interface .two jobs in the network . IP traffic only .used on the local router only! .the host or a phone set the qos --.Non-fragmented .a way to mark traffic without manipulating the traffic in any way PHB ( per hop behaviour) Trust Boundaries . logic interfaces .they can be refernced in the match protocol and port-map syntax # ip nbar custom MyAPP 8 ascii SAMPLE tcp range 2000 2999 . GRE .for example web traffic carrying a jpg PDLM .IPV6 .ip phone marks the traffic as voice .transit router do not need to look deep in the packet to identify the flow.or the access layer . match protocol .or the distribution layer .typically the trust boundary is the device itself ..typically never the core . for example ICMP ..PDLMs not already in the IOS are non-native Custom Define Custom protocls .the header as a traffic class byte that works just like ToS field with DSCP .Not supported on etherchannel .Marking type .App that use dynamic TCP and UDP ports. .NOn tcp & non udp ip protocols .do we reclassify and remark .
.qos for use with GRE and IPSEC Vpns .cloned header never leave the local router .GRE & IPSEC are supported .qos policy propogation via BGP . other BGP attribut e.we use this feature to propogate qos policy for source or destination in the n etwork.Since 11.ipsec duplicated the original ToS byte into the new encrypted packets header. QPPB .ToS bytt copied into GRE header . FLOWS# 1-FIFO 2-WFQ -sort traffic into conversation .R1 will send these values to R2 .Due to performance enhancements recommended even when all you want to see is T oS byte.the router can identify using thing like .Qos mechanism sess the header and ToS byte just like normal .Pre-classification .This is not ToS Byte preservation feature .sourve / dst . BGP community listes and BGP As paths . AS path . prefix .this even works with GRE/ IPSEC tunnels .R2 is configured to set the IP precedence for the AS200 Prefixes Mechanics .fair ---interactive flows (based on packet size) can be placed at front of sog tware queue .A clone is created of all original packet headers . then the clone is used for qos on the output interface.dedicated queue for each flow .required CEF --> E.translate the attribute into the either ip precednece or qos group. .g . .3T .An encrypted packet header cannot be read for the QOS marking ToS Byte preservation .BGP routes coming from AS 200 will be marked with a special community value 0f 100:11 ingress at R1 .allocate BW fairly .high volume talker willnot monopolize the interface What is Flow? .Use ip precedence to provide our managed unfairness . this is automatic --we cnanot contorl .this allows for qos calssification based on more than just the ToS byte . . .Allows Packet classifcation usiong access lists . then into the ipSEC header.encode a value using the BGP coomunity .
one issue .less than 64k .weight is calculated from ip precedence .support for user defined traffic classes .up to 1000 for RSVP .also interface configured on Multilink PPP CBWFQ Overview ( also known as low latency queueing) . Weight in WFQ .? .port number .number for Diffserv flows is based on BW ..Src /Dst ports .remeber what CB always tell us .more than 512 k .256 ..WFQ is the default on physical interface less than 2MB .Note : The ip presedence has no effect on the dropping strategy. finish time is a factor o f : . MQC ..Tos ..parameted used for hash algorithn that is used as the index for the queue how many queues are used.probability is 15% for 5 concurrent flows and 64 queues..lowest :finish times" are chosen first to transmit .packet length .16 .flows can end up in same queue =----.8 for system packets .pros simple supported almost everywhere prevents aggresive flows from starving others better than nothing .Cons multiple flows in one queue no contorl WFQ can be default .the HQO ( Hold queue out ) limit controls the maximum packets in the WFQ syst em .WFQ on STEROIDS! . WFQ DROP .ip precedence WFQ pros and cons ( No control when Congestion occurs on priority traffic) .CDT ( congestive discard threshold ) controls early dropping of packet from the most aggressive flows .note the a flow is unidirectional .
Adaptive flows .too fair All legacy methods are rough with the per-interface cli config CBWFQ and its extension method .randomly drop packets before the queue reaches capacity .but at the risk of queue starvation CQ .LLQ are the ultimate CBWFQ Scheduling .prevent the ocngestion in the first place .like the predecessor .Gurantee at least a certian amount of bandwidth for traffic classes Why is it the ultimate? PQ .sure voice quality rocks .tail drop can be avoided .start sending few packets .you cannot mix approach pros & cons ..then increase exponentially .TCP slow start kicks -Think about tail drop in relation to this can cause global synchronizat ion RED ( Random early Detection) .voice traffic can still suffer from too much delay LLQ = CBWFQ + PQ PQ is policied LLQ= CBWFQ + PQ use Voice bandwidth calculator ==================== QOS 4 -> Congestion Avoidance ( Tail DRops) --> TCP Sender .increase the drop rate as the queue gets more full .if there is issue with ACK .weight are defined bw in kbps % of bandwidth % of remaining availble BW .voice suffers from delay WFQ come on . weights are key .
random drops prevent global sync RED Profiles .ra ndom drops start . but not needed .compress the IP and TCP header & RTP header .to match the CIR POlicing Vs Shaping .reduce delay increase BW .TCP header and CB TCP header compression .Uses for voice LFI ( Link Efficiency information) .tail drop .drop or remark -.to mark down excedding traffic WHy shaping? -to prevent congestion in the wan where as asymetric BW exists .drops the packets if excess from the defined BW WHy police?> .Minimum threshold.egress only .mark probability denominator OVerview: shaping .less buffer usage .multilink PPP with interleaci software queue---> TxRing LLQ------> FIFO Cisco swtches has their own qos mechnism for each type of switch ..when the average queue hits this or goes above .policing .maximum threshold .queue ( Buffer) .ingress & Egree .fat access is available .limit rate of certian apps or traffic calsses .Support frame congestoin indicators Compression .queues excess packets to say under a certain rate policing .Shaping . 40 bytes down to 2 or 4 bytes .
layer 2 switches Example given below: e.g Engress INterfaces 4Q1P3T meanings 4--> queus 1 --> priority queue 3 --> drop thresholds RR ( Round Robin ) MDRR( Modified Deficied RR) WRR SHRR Note : Read the switch documentation before applying the QOS mechnism mls qos --> multilayer qos .