Login | Register For Free | Help
Search for: (Advanced)

Mailing List Archive: Cisco: BBA

To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??

 

 

Cisco bba RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded


andy.saykao at staff

Sep 6, 2009, 11:41 PM

Post #1 of 21 (11614 views)
Permalink
To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??

Hi All,

Is it better to shape or police DSL subscribers that have exceeded their
quota or does it not matter which method you choose? We are currently
using CoA with policing but I've been asked to investigate whether we
should look at shaping instead of policing. My testing reveals that
policing is more bursty as seen below.

*** Example with Policing ***

policy-map POLICE-TEST
class class-default
police 48000 9000 18000 conform-action transmit exceed-action
drop violate-action drop

Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=POLICE-TEST"

Download speeds fluctuate between 5.2 - 7.6KB/sec. More bursty.

*** Example with Shaping ***

policy-map SHAPE-TEST
class class-default
shape average 48000

Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=SHAPE-TEST"

Download speeds remain at constant 5.6KB/sec. Very little bursting.

Any pro's and con's to either method???

Thanks.

Andy

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
Please notify the sender immediately by email if you have received this
email by mistake and delete this email from your system. Please note that
any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the
author and do not necessarily represent those of the organisation.
Finally, the recipient should check this email and any attachments for
the presence of viruses. The organisation accepts no liability for any
damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.


arievayner at gmail

Sep 7, 2009, 12:01 AM

Post #2 of 21 (11300 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Andy,

One thing about shaping is that it takes more resources (mainly CPU) from
the router.
What kind of a router is that?

Arie

On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Andy Saykao <
andy.saykao [at] staff> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> Is it better to shape or police DSL subscribers that have exceeded their
> quota or does it not matter which method you choose? We are currently
> using CoA with policing but I've been asked to investigate whether we should
> look at shaping instead of policing. My testing reveals that policing is
> more bursty as seen below.
>
> *** Example with Policing ***
>
> policy-map POLICE-TEST
> class class-default
> police 48000 9000 18000 conform-action transmit exceed-action
> drop violate-action drop
>
> Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=POLICE-TEST"
>
> Download speeds fluctuate between 5.2 - 7.6KB/sec. More bursty.
>
> *** Example with Shaping ***
>
> policy-map SHAPE-TEST
> class class-default
> shape average 48000
> Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=SHAPE-TEST"
>
> Download speeds remain at constant 5.6KB/sec. Very little bursting.
>
> Any pro's and con's to either method???
>
> Thanks.
>
> Andy
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
> Please notify the sender immediately by email if you have received this
> email by mistake and delete this email from your system. Please note that
> any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author
> and do not necessarily represent those of the organisation. Finally, the
> recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of
> viruses. The organisation accepts no liability for any damage caused by any
> virus transmitted by this email.
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>


andy.saykao at staff

Sep 7, 2009, 12:03 AM

Post #3 of 21 (11308 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Hi Arie,

We have a mixture of 7301's, 7200 VXR's and ASR 1004.

Cheers.

Andy

________________________________

From: Arie Vayner [mailto:arievayner [at] gmail]
Sent: Monday, 7 September 2009 5:02 PM
To: Andy Saykao
Cc: cisco-bba [at] puck
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??


Andy,

One thing about shaping is that it takes more resources (mainly CPU)
from the router.
What kind of a router is that?

Arie


On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Andy Saykao
<andy.saykao [at] staff> wrote:


Hi All,

Is it better to shape or police DSL subscribers that have
exceeded their quota or does it not matter which method you choose? We
are currently using CoA with policing but I've been asked to investigate
whether we should look at shaping instead of policing. My testing
reveals that policing is more bursty as seen below.

*** Example with Policing ***

policy-map POLICE-TEST
class class-default
police 48000 9000 18000 conform-action transmit
exceed-action drop violate-action drop

Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=POLICE-TEST"

Download speeds fluctuate between 5.2 - 7.6KB/sec. More bursty.

*** Example with Shaping ***

policy-map SHAPE-TEST
class class-default
shape average 48000

Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=SHAPE-TEST"


Download speeds remain at constant 5.6KB/sec. Very little
bursting.

Any pro's and con's to either method???

Thanks.

Andy

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential
and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. Please notify the sender immediately by email if you have
received this email by mistake and delete this email from your system.
Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are
solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
organisation. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any
attachments for the presence of viruses. The organisation accepts no
liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.


_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba




______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
______________________________________________________________________


arievayner at gmail

Sep 7, 2009, 12:05 AM

Post #4 of 21 (11309 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

So from the performance point of view, you would see a hit if you use many
shapers on the software based boxes (7301/7200). On ASR it should be better.
I have seen many ISPs use policing, and it worked just fine.

Arie

On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 10:03 AM, Andy Saykao <
andy.saykao [at] staff> wrote:

> Hi Arie,
>
> We have a mixture of 7301's, 7200 VXR's and ASR 1004.
>
> Cheers.
>
> Andy
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Arie Vayner [mailto:arievayner [at] gmail]
> *Sent:* Monday, 7 September 2009 5:02 PM
> *To:* Andy Saykao
> *Cc:* cisco-bba [at] puck
> *Subject:* Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??
>
> Andy,
>
> One thing about shaping is that it takes more resources (mainly CPU) from
> the router.
> What kind of a router is that?
>
> Arie
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 9:41 AM, Andy Saykao <
> andy.saykao [at] staff> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> Is it better to shape or police DSL subscribers that have exceeded their
>> quota or does it not matter which method you choose? We are currently
>> using CoA with policing but I've been asked to investigate whether we should
>> look at shaping instead of policing. My testing reveals that policing is
>> more bursty as seen below.
>>
>> *** Example with Policing ***
>>
>> policy-map POLICE-TEST
>> class class-default
>> police 48000 9000 18000 conform-action transmit exceed-action
>> drop violate-action drop
>>
>> Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=POLICE-TEST"
>>
>> Download speeds fluctuate between 5.2 - 7.6KB/sec. More bursty.
>>
>> *** Example with Shaping ***
>>
>> policy-map SHAPE-TEST
>> class class-default
>> shape average 48000
>> Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=SHAPE-TEST"
>>
>> Download speeds remain at constant 5.6KB/sec. Very little bursting.
>>
>> Any pro's and con's to either method???
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Andy
>>
>> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
>> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
>> Please notify the sender immediately by email if you have received this
>> email by mistake and delete this email from your system. Please note that
>> any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author
>> and do not necessarily represent those of the organisation. Finally, the
>> recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of
>> viruses. The organisation accepts no liability for any damage caused by any
>> virus transmitted by this email.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> cisco-bba mailing list
>> cisco-bba [at] puck
>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
> For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
> ______________________________________________________________________
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended
> solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
> Please notify the sender immediately by email if you have received this
> email by mistake and delete this email from your system. Please note that
> any views or opinions presented in this email are solely those of the author
> and do not necessarily represent those of the organisation. Finally, the
> recipient should check this email and any attachments for the presence of
> viruses. The organisation accepts no liability for any damage caused by any
> virus transmitted by this email.
>


td_miles at yahoo

Sep 7, 2009, 12:45 AM

Post #5 of 21 (11437 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Hi Andy,

My $0.02 is to just police it. If they're plain old DSL connections don't waste the resources on shaping them, even if it does seem minute now.

You'll also find that the more TCP sessions you have over the same link the smoother the graph will look with policing.

Not sure what you're doing the testing with, but I'd suggest iperf and then look at the difference between using one simultaneous thread and 10 (iperf option "-P 10"). The more threads you have, the smoother it will get, even with policing. This is due to the way TCP works so that when a packet gets "lost" it backs off a little which is why you see a typical "sawtooth" graph for TCP sessions.

Alternatively you can test with UDP packets (iperf option "-u") and fire as much traffic as you want at your shaper (ie. 10Mbps if you like !). What escapes through the policer should be a fairly steady stream at your policing limit as UDP has no concept of flow control.



regards,
Tony.


--- On Mon, 7/9/09, Arie Vayner <arievayner [at] gmail> wrote:

> From: Arie Vayner <arievayner [at] gmail>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??
> To: "Andy Saykao" <andy.saykao [at] staff>
> Cc: cisco-bba [at] puck
> Received: Monday, 7 September, 2009, 5:05 PM
> So from the performance point of view, you
> would see a hit if you use many shapers on the software
> based boxes (7301/7200). On ASR it should be better.
> I have seen many ISPs use policing, and it worked just
> fine.
>
>
>
> Arie
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 10:03 AM,
> Andy Saykao <andy.saykao [at] staff>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi Arie,
>  
> We have a mixture of 7301's, 7200
> VXR's and ASR
> 1004.
>  
> Cheers.
>  
> Andy
>
>
>
> From: Arie Vayner
> [mailto:arievayner [at] gmail]
>
>
> Sent: Monday, 7 September 2009 5:02 PM
> To: Andy
> Saykao
> Cc: cisco-bba [at] puck
> Subject: Re:
> [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??
>
>
> Andy,
>
> One thing about shaping is that it takes more resources
> (mainly CPU) from the router.
> What kind of a router is
> that?
>
> Arie
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 9:41 AM,
> Andy Saykao <andy.saykao [at] staff>
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi
> All,
>  
> Is it better to
> shape or police DSL
> subscribers that have exceeded their quota or does it not
> matter which method
> you choose? We are currently using
> CoA with policing but I've been asked to investigate
> whether we should look at
> shaping instead of policing. My testing reveals that
> policing is more bursty
> as seen below.
>  
> *** Example with
> Policing
> ***
>  
> policy-map
> POLICE-TEST
>   class
> class-default
>    police 48000 9000 18000   
> conform-action transmit     exceed-action
> drop     violate-action drop
>  
> Using:
> cisco-avpair =
>
> "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=POLICE-TEST"
>
>
> Download speeds
> fluctuate between 5.2 -
> 7.6KB/sec. More bursty.
>  
> *** Example with
> Shaping
> ***
>  
> policy-map
> SHAPE-TEST
>   class
> class-default
>     shape average
> 48000
>
> Using:
> cisco-avpair =
>
> "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=SHAPE-TEST"
>  
>
> Download speeds
> remain
> at constant 5.6KB/sec. Very little
> bursting.
>  
> Any pro's and
> con's to either
> method???
>  
> Thanks.
>  
> Andy


__________________________________________________________________________________
Get more done like never before with Yahoo!7 Mail.
Learn more: http://au.overview.mail.yahoo.com/

_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


gk at ax

Feb 16, 2011, 10:49 AM

Post #6 of 21 (8888 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Sorry for dig out this old thread but I'am in the process to test some
QoS features on our LNS and stumbled upon this post :-).

My question - what IOS version support such QoS policies to be applied
to individual users/sessions from RADIUS on a NPE-G2 LNS and what is the
difference between this 2 features:

1) "QoS: Per-Session Shaping and Queuing on LNS "
Cisco FN: supported in 12.2SB but not in 12.2SRE

2) "Per-User QoS via AAA Policy Name"
Cisco FN: supported in 12.2SB and 12.2SRE

We have just moved from 12.2SB to 12.2SRE on our NPE-G2 LNS for some
reasons and it seems that this version does not support that kind of
configuration. I've tried some simple configurations like the originator
of this thread has done and I see that config and the RADIUS attr's will
be 'accepted' from the LNS but the policy configured in the user profile
will be not 'applied' to the Virtual-Interface of the session/user:


------8<-------

LNS Config
==========
!
policy-map STCR-ADSL-3M
class class-default
police rate percent 10
!

RADIUS Config
=============
xxx-gktest2 Password:="testtest"
Framed-Route="1.2.3.4",
Cisco-AVPair+="lcp:interface-config=service-policy output STCR-ADSL-3M"


DEBUG
=====

LNS Debug Log:
1375621: Feb 16 18:26:08.041: RADIUS: 1812, Access-Accept, len 106
1375623: Feb 16 18:26:08.041: RADIUS: Vendor, Cisco [26] 63
1375624: Feb 16 18:26:08.041: RADIUS: Cisco AVpair [1] 57
"lcp:interface-config=service-policy output STCR-ADSL-3M"
1375625: Feb 16 18:26:08.041: RADIUS: Framed-IP-Address [8] 6
1.2.3.4
...
1375675: Feb 16 18:26:08.045: SSS PM [uid:85][184D0B28]: RULE: VRF
Parsing routine:
1375676: interface-config "service-policy output STCR-ADSL-3M"
1375677: addr 1.2.3.4
1375679: Feb 16 18:26:08.045: SSS PM: Multihop disabled
1375680: Feb 16 18:26:08.045: SSS AAA AUTHOR [uid:85]: SIP PPP[13C0894]
parsed as Success
...
1375715: Feb 16 18:26:08.053: AAA/BIND(0000691E): Bind i/f Virtual-Access46
1375774: Feb 16 18:26:08.261: Vi46 IPCP: State is Open
1375775: Feb 16 18:26:08.261: AAA/AUTHOR: Processing PerUser AV route
1375776: Feb 16 18:26:08.261: Vi46 Added to neighbor route AVL tree:
topoid 0, address 1.2.3.4
1375777: Feb 16 18:26:08.261: Vi46 IPCP: Install route to 1.2.3.4


LNS#sh policy-map

Policy Map STCR-ADSL-3M
Class class-default
police rate percent 10
conform-action transmit
exceed-action drop

LNS#show subscriber sess | inc test
85 Vi46 authen Local Term xxx-gktest 00:48:44
LNS#show policy-map session uid 85
LNS#

LNS#sh user wi | inc test
Vi46 xxx-gktest2
LNS#sh run int virtual-access 46
!
interface Virtual-Access46
ip mtu 1452
ip verify unicast reverse-path
ip tcp adjust-mss 1412
no logging event link-status
no snmp trap link-status
end
LNS#show policy-map interface virtual-access 46
LNS#

------8<-------


--
Gerald

Am 07.09.2009 08:41, schrieb Andy Saykao:
> Hi All,
>
> Is it better to shape or police DSL subscribers that have exceeded their
> quota or does it not matter which method you choose? We are currently
> using CoA with policing but I've been asked to investigate whether we
> should look at shaping instead of policing. My testing reveals that
> policing is more bursty as seen below.
>
> *** Example with Policing ***
>
> policy-map POLICE-TEST
> class class-default
> police 48000 9000 18000 conform-action transmit exceed-action
> drop violate-action drop
>
> Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=POLICE-TEST"
>
> Download speeds fluctuate between 5.2 - 7.6KB/sec. More bursty.
>
> *** Example with Shaping ***
>
> policy-map SHAPE-TEST
> class class-default
> shape average 48000
> Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=SHAPE-TEST"
>
> Download speeds remain at constant 5.6KB/sec. Very little bursting.
>
> Any pro's and con's to either method???
>
> Thanks.
>
> Andy
>
> This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
> addressed. Please notify the sender immediately by email if you have
> received this email by mistake and delete this email from your system.
> Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are
> solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
> organisation. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any
> attachments for the presence of viruses. The organisation accepts no
> liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba

_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


td_miles at yahoo

Feb 17, 2011, 3:37 AM

Post #7 of 21 (8951 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Hi Gerald,

--- On Thu, 17/2/11, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax> wrote:

> From: Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax>
> Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??
> To: cisco-bba [at] puck
> Received: Thursday, 17 February, 2011, 5:49 AM
>
> Sorry for dig out this old thread but
> I'am in the process to test some
> QoS features on our LNS and stumbled upon this post :-).
>
> My question - what IOS version support such QoS policies to
> be applied
> to individual users/sessions from RADIUS on a NPE-G2 LNS
> and what is the
> difference between this 2 features:
>
>  1) "QoS: Per-Session Shaping and Queuing on LNS "
>      Cisco FN: supported in 12.2SB but
> not in 12.2SRE
>
>  2) "Per-User QoS via AAA Policy Name"
>      Cisco FN: supported in 12.2SB and
> 12.2SRE
>

I don't know about what features are supported in which IOS version and how exactly you should use them, but I can tell you what we are doing that works, which might help you. There are probably other ways to do the same thing, this is what works for us.

We are running 12.2(33)SRD1 on 7204's. I can't see why this won't also work on SRE.

On the box we have QoS policies configured like this one (this is for a link that is primarily used for VoIP, but also has some file replication that is limited fairly harshly to avoid it affecting the VoIP)

!
policy-map xyz-512k-voip-shaper-child
class xyz-voip-traffic
priority 400
class class-xyz-replication
police 64000 3000 conform-action transmit exceed-action drop
!
policy-map xyz-512k-voip-shaper-parent
class class-default
shape average 460000
service-policy xyz-512k-voip-shaper-child
!

On the RADIUS we have this Cisco-AVPair being returned:

Cisco-AVPair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=xyz-512k-voip-shaper-parent"

On the LNS it looks like this:

#show run int virtual-access 1592
!
interface Virtual-Access1592
bandwidth 155520
no ip address
ip load-sharing per-packet
ip ospf mtu-ignore
load-interval 30
no clns route-cache
end


#show policy-map int virtual-access 1592
Virtual-Access1592
SSS session identifier 476 -

Service-policy output: xyz-512k-voip-shaper-parent

Class-map: class-default (match-any)
13107796 packets, 1644703212 bytes
30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: any
13107797 packets, 1644703280 bytes
30 second rate 1000 bps
Queueing
queue limit 115 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 13103036/1706908189
shape (average) cir 460000, bc 1840, be 1840
target shape rate 460000

Service-policy : xyz-512k-voip-shaper-child

queue stats for all priority classes:
Queueing
queue limit 100 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 2304070/314898450

Class-map: xyz-voip-traffic (match-all)
2304068 packets, 246793802 bytes
30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: access-group name xyz-voip-acl
Priority: 400 kbps, burst bytes 10000, b/w exceed drops: 0


Class-map: class-xyz-replication (match-all)
3974924 packets, 513208591 bytes
30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: access-group name xyz-replication
police:
cir 64000 bps, bc 3000 bytes
conformed 3970110 packets, 510621222 bytes; actions:
transmit
exceeded 4815 packets, 2587369 bytes; actions:
drop
conformed 0000 bps, exceed 0000 bps

Class-map: class-default (match-any)
6828803 packets, 884700887 bytes
30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: any
6828804 packets, 884700887 bytes
30 second rate 1000 bps

queue limit 15 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 10798966/1706908189


You will notice that you can't see the QoS settings that have been applied using a "show run int" command, but you can see with "show policy-map".

Hope this helps.


regards,
Tony Miles.






_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


ariev at vayner

Feb 17, 2011, 5:34 AM

Post #8 of 21 (8959 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Gerald,

If I am not wrong, the issue is the "percent" value you are using... percent
has to be applied in your case with a parent shaper, which would define the
100% pipe...
Change the percent to an absolute value, and it should work just fine.

Arie

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax> wrote:

> Sorry for dig out this old thread but I'am in the process to test some
> QoS features on our LNS and stumbled upon this post :-).
>
> My question - what IOS version support such QoS policies to be applied
> to individual users/sessions from RADIUS on a NPE-G2 LNS and what is the
> difference between this 2 features:
>
> 1) "QoS: Per-Session Shaping and Queuing on LNS "
> Cisco FN: supported in 12.2SB but not in 12.2SRE
>
> 2) "Per-User QoS via AAA Policy Name"
> Cisco FN: supported in 12.2SB and 12.2SRE
>
> We have just moved from 12.2SB to 12.2SRE on our NPE-G2 LNS for some
> reasons and it seems that this version does not support that kind of
> configuration. I've tried some simple configurations like the originator
> of this thread has done and I see that config and the RADIUS attr's will
> be 'accepted' from the LNS but the policy configured in the user profile
> will be not 'applied' to the Virtual-Interface of the session/user:
>
>
> ------8<-------
>
> LNS Config
> ==========
> !
> policy-map STCR-ADSL-3M
> class class-default
> police rate percent 10
> !
>
> RADIUS Config
> =============
> xxx-gktest2 Password:="testtest"
> Framed-Route="1.2.3.4",
> Cisco-AVPair+="lcp:interface-config=service-policy output
> STCR-ADSL-3M"
>
>
> DEBUG
> =====
>
> LNS Debug Log:
> 1375621: Feb 16 18:26:08.041: RADIUS: 1812, Access-Accept, len 106
> 1375623: Feb 16 18:26:08.041: RADIUS: Vendor, Cisco [26] 63
> 1375624: Feb 16 18:26:08.041: RADIUS: Cisco AVpair [1] 57
> "lcp:interface-config=service-policy output STCR-ADSL-3M"
> 1375625: Feb 16 18:26:08.041: RADIUS: Framed-IP-Address [8] 6
> 1.2.3.4
> ...
> 1375675: Feb 16 18:26:08.045: SSS PM [uid:85][184D0B28]: RULE: VRF
> Parsing routine:
> 1375676: interface-config "service-policy output STCR-ADSL-3M"
> 1375677: addr 1.2.3.4
> 1375679: Feb 16 18:26:08.045: SSS PM: Multihop disabled
> 1375680: Feb 16 18:26:08.045: SSS AAA AUTHOR [uid:85]: SIP PPP[13C0894]
> parsed as Success
> ...
> 1375715: Feb 16 18:26:08.053: AAA/BIND(0000691E): Bind i/f Virtual-Access46
> 1375774: Feb 16 18:26:08.261: Vi46 IPCP: State is Open
> 1375775: Feb 16 18:26:08.261: AAA/AUTHOR: Processing PerUser AV route
> 1375776: Feb 16 18:26:08.261: Vi46 Added to neighbor route AVL tree:
> topoid 0, address 1.2.3.4
> 1375777: Feb 16 18:26:08.261: Vi46 IPCP: Install route to 1.2.3.4
>
>
> LNS#sh policy-map
>
> Policy Map STCR-ADSL-3M
> Class class-default
> police rate percent 10
> conform-action transmit
> exceed-action drop
>
> LNS#show subscriber sess | inc test
> 85 Vi46 authen Local Term xxx-gktest 00:48:44
> LNS#show policy-map session uid 85
> LNS#
>
> LNS#sh user wi | inc test
> Vi46 xxx-gktest2
> LNS#sh run int virtual-access 46
> !
> interface Virtual-Access46
> ip mtu 1452
> ip verify unicast reverse-path
> ip tcp adjust-mss 1412
> no logging event link-status
> no snmp trap link-status
> end
> LNS#show policy-map interface virtual-access 46
> LNS#
>
> ------8<-------
>
>
> --
> Gerald
>
> Am 07.09.2009 08:41, schrieb Andy Saykao:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Is it better to shape or police DSL subscribers that have exceeded their
> > quota or does it not matter which method you choose? We are currently
> > using CoA with policing but I've been asked to investigate whether we
> > should look at shaping instead of policing. My testing reveals that
> > policing is more bursty as seen below.
> >
> > *** Example with Policing ***
> >
> > policy-map POLICE-TEST
> > class class-default
> > police 48000 9000 18000 conform-action transmit exceed-action
> > drop violate-action drop
> >
> > Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=POLICE-TEST"
> >
> > Download speeds fluctuate between 5.2 - 7.6KB/sec. More bursty.
> >
> > *** Example with Shaping ***
> >
> > policy-map SHAPE-TEST
> > class class-default
> > shape average 48000
> > Using: cisco-avpair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=SHAPE-TEST"
> >
> > Download speeds remain at constant 5.6KB/sec. Very little bursting.
> >
> > Any pro's and con's to either method???
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Andy
> >
> > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
> > intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are
> > addressed. Please notify the sender immediately by email if you have
> > received this email by mistake and delete this email from your system.
> > Please note that any views or opinions presented in this email are
> > solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the
> > organisation. Finally, the recipient should check this email and any
> > attachments for the presence of viruses. The organisation accepts no
> > liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this email.
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > cisco-bba mailing list
> > cisco-bba [at] puck
> > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>


gk at ax

Feb 21, 2011, 3:03 AM

Post #9 of 21 (8807 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Am 17.02.2011 14:34, schrieb Arie Vayner:
> Gerald,
>
> If I am not wrong, the issue is the "percent" value you are using...
> percent has to be applied in your case with a parent shaper, which would
> define the 100% pipe...
> Change the percent to an absolute value, and it should work just fine.

Indeed, that works (I thought I've tried it before, but obviously
not...). Now I should be able to test some more complex QoS
configurations. Thx Arie for your hint!

--
Gerald

_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


gk at ax

Feb 21, 2011, 3:16 AM

Post #10 of 21 (8842 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Hi Tony,

my initial problem was the missing parent shaper in my config (like Arie
observed). Right after changing the relative 'percent' value in to an
fixed rate my simple (non-HQoS) policy became active on the
Virtual-Interface.
I hope I can now enable some more complex (H)QoS configs too and your
example below looks like an good template for me. Thank you for the
response! I'll going to try it out now...

--
Gerald

Am 17.02.2011 12:37, schrieb Tony:
> Hi Gerald,
>
> --- On Thu, 17/2/11, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax> wrote:
>
>> From: Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax>
>> Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??
>> To: cisco-bba [at] puck
>> Received: Thursday, 17 February, 2011, 5:49 AM
>>
>> Sorry for dig out this old thread but
>> I'am in the process to test some
>> QoS features on our LNS and stumbled upon this post :-).
>>
>> My question - what IOS version support such QoS policies to
>> be applied
>> to individual users/sessions from RADIUS on a NPE-G2 LNS
>> and what is the
>> difference between this 2 features:
>>
>> 1) "QoS: Per-Session Shaping and Queuing on LNS "
>> Cisco FN: supported in 12.2SB but
>> not in 12.2SRE
>>
>> 2) "Per-User QoS via AAA Policy Name"
>> Cisco FN: supported in 12.2SB and
>> 12.2SRE
>>
>
> I don't know about what features are supported in which IOS version and how exactly you should use them, but I can tell you what we are doing that works, which might help you. There are probably other ways to do the same thing, this is what works for us.
>
> We are running 12.2(33)SRD1 on 7204's. I can't see why this won't also work on SRE.
>
> On the box we have QoS policies configured like this one (this is for a link that is primarily used for VoIP, but also has some file replication that is limited fairly harshly to avoid it affecting the VoIP)
>
> !
> policy-map xyz-512k-voip-shaper-child
> class xyz-voip-traffic
> priority 400
> class class-xyz-replication
> police 64000 3000 conform-action transmit exceed-action drop
> !
> policy-map xyz-512k-voip-shaper-parent
> class class-default
> shape average 460000
> service-policy xyz-512k-voip-shaper-child
> !
>
> On the RADIUS we have this Cisco-AVPair being returned:
>
> Cisco-AVPair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=xyz-512k-voip-shaper-parent"
>
> On the LNS it looks like this:
>
> #show run int virtual-access 1592
> !
> interface Virtual-Access1592
> bandwidth 155520
> no ip address
> ip load-sharing per-packet
> ip ospf mtu-ignore
> load-interval 30
> no clns route-cache
> end
>
>
> #show policy-map int virtual-access 1592
> Virtual-Access1592
> SSS session identifier 476 -
>
> Service-policy output: xyz-512k-voip-shaper-parent
>
> Class-map: class-default (match-any)
> 13107796 packets, 1644703212 bytes
> 30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
> Match: any
> 13107797 packets, 1644703280 bytes
> 30 second rate 1000 bps
> Queueing
> queue limit 115 packets
> (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
> (pkts output/bytes output) 13103036/1706908189
> shape (average) cir 460000, bc 1840, be 1840
> target shape rate 460000
>
> Service-policy : xyz-512k-voip-shaper-child
>
> queue stats for all priority classes:
> Queueing
> queue limit 100 packets
> (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
> (pkts output/bytes output) 2304070/314898450
>
> Class-map: xyz-voip-traffic (match-all)
> 2304068 packets, 246793802 bytes
> 30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
> Match: access-group name xyz-voip-acl
> Priority: 400 kbps, burst bytes 10000, b/w exceed drops: 0
>
>
> Class-map: class-xyz-replication (match-all)
> 3974924 packets, 513208591 bytes
> 30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
> Match: access-group name xyz-replication
> police:
> cir 64000 bps, bc 3000 bytes
> conformed 3970110 packets, 510621222 bytes; actions:
> transmit
> exceeded 4815 packets, 2587369 bytes; actions:
> drop
> conformed 0000 bps, exceed 0000 bps
>
> Class-map: class-default (match-any)
> 6828803 packets, 884700887 bytes
> 30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
> Match: any
> 6828804 packets, 884700887 bytes
> 30 second rate 1000 bps
>
> queue limit 15 packets
> (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
> (pkts output/bytes output) 10798966/1706908189
>
>
> You will notice that you can't see the QoS settings that have been applied using a "show run int" command, but you can see with "show policy-map".
>
> Hope this helps.
>
>
> regards,
> Tony Miles.
>
>
>
>
>
>

_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


gk at ax

Feb 21, 2011, 11:53 AM

Post #11 of 21 (8815 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Am 21.02.2011 12:03, schrieb Gerald Krause:
> Am 17.02.2011 14:34, schrieb Arie Vayner:
>> Gerald,
>>
>> If I am not wrong, the issue is the "percent" value you are using...
>> percent has to be applied in your case with a parent shaper, which would
>> define the 100% pipe...
>> Change the percent to an absolute value, and it should work just fine.
>
> Indeed, that works (I thought I've tried it before, but obviously
> not...). Now I should be able to test some more complex QoS
> configurations. Thx Arie for your hint!

After some further testing I see now this behaviour:

- NPE-G2 with 12.2(33)SRE2
- receiving L2TP/VPDN PPP sessions via GE interface
(LNS is a stub router)

Test 1 (police)
===============
!
policy-map PM-STCR-ADSL-3M
class class-default
police 3000000
!

Result:

1) I can apply this PM to an Session/VirtAccInt through RADIUS via
"lcp:interface-config=service-policy..."
or
"ip:sub-policy-Out..."

2) I can *not* apply this PM to an Session/VirtAccInt through RADIUS via
"ip:sub-qos-policy-out..."


Test 2 (shape)
==============
!
policy-map PM-STCR-ADSL-3M
class class-default
shape average 3000000
!

Result:

1) I can *not* apply this PM to an Session/VirtAccInt through RADIUS via
any of this 3 attribute values:
"lcp:interface-config=service-policy..."
"ip:sub-policy-Out..."
"ip:sub-qos-policy-out..."


So I can use only 'police' but not 'shape', 'priority' or 'bandwidth' in
the policy-maps. If I use shape/priority/bandwidth in any parent or
child policy-map, the whole policy will not be applied to the
Virtual-Access interface.

Is there any other thing that I may have overlooked?

--
Gerald

_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


gk at ax

Feb 21, 2011, 12:03 PM

Post #12 of 21 (8816 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Am 21.02.2011 12:16, schrieb Gerald Krause:
> Am 17.02.2011 12:37, schrieb Tony:
>> !
>> policy-map xyz-512k-voip-shaper-child
>> class xyz-voip-traffic
>> priority 400
>> class class-xyz-replication
>> police 64000 3000 conform-action transmit exceed-action drop
>> !
>> policy-map xyz-512k-voip-shaper-parent
>> class class-default
>> shape average 460000
>> service-policy xyz-512k-voip-shaper-child
>> !
>>
>> On the RADIUS we have this Cisco-AVPair being returned:
>>
>> Cisco-AVPair = "ip:sub-qos-policy-out=xyz-512k-voip-shaper-parent"

Hi Tony,

on what kind of interface do you receive the L2TP/VPDN sessions - GE,
ATM? I had no luck with any 'shape' or 'priority' policy-map so far -
only 'police' works for me now.

--
Gerald
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


td_miles at yahoo

Feb 21, 2011, 12:24 PM

Post #13 of 21 (8805 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

--- On Tue, 22/2/11, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax> wrote:
>
> Hi Tony,
>
> on what kind of interface do you receive the L2TP/VPDN
> sessions - GE,
> ATM? I had no luck with any 'shape' or 'priority'
> policy-map so far -
> only 'police' works for me now.
>

ATM.

As a thought, have you tried to configure a "normal" GE sub-int and see what policies you can apply ? If a QoS policy won't apply then you might see why in the logs. You should also be able to debug why it's not applying the policy, but I don't know which debug that would be.


regards,
Tony.




_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


gk at ax

Feb 21, 2011, 1:58 PM

Post #14 of 21 (8837 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Am 21.02.11 21:24, schrieb Tony:
> --- On Tue, 22/2/11, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Tony,
>>
>> on what kind of interface do you receive the L2TP/VPDN
>> sessions - GE,
>> ATM? I had no luck with any 'shape' or 'priority'
>> policy-map so far -
>> only 'police' works for me now.
>>
>
> ATM.
>
> As a thought, have you tried to configure a "normal" GE sub-int and see what policies you can apply ? If a QoS policy won't apply then you might see why in the logs. You should also be able to debug why it's not applying the policy, but I don't know which debug that would be.

Hm, ATM - I might remember a cisco QoS document that state that there
exist some differences between VPDN sessions on ATM and GE interfaces in
conjuction with per-user QoS but I can not find the document at the
moment (I terminate myself the L2TP/VPDN sessions on a GE interface).

And I have already activated some debug options.

LNS#sh debug
General OS:
AAA Authorization debugging is on
AAA Per-user attributes debugging is on
PPP:
PPP authentication debugging is on
PPP protocol negotiation debugging is on
L2TP:
L2TP errors debugging is on
SSS:
SSS Manager errors debugging is on
SSS AAA authorization event debugging is on
SSS policy all debugs debugging is on
Subscriber Service Switch/Policy profile:
Subscriber profile events debugging is on

But the logfile did not tell me anything special when a policy-map won't
be applied. Ok, still searching for some other doc's on cisco.com and
trying other configurations...

--
Gerald
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


gk at ax

Feb 21, 2011, 2:43 PM

Post #15 of 21 (8807 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Am 21.02.11 20:53, schrieb Gerald Krause:
> Is there any other thing that I may have overlooked?

Quick Question - do we need some kind of "Broadband License" to use this
feature? We are running a standard ADVIPSERVICES IOS 12.2(33)SRE2, no
special license and no ISG.

--
Gerald
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


mauritz at three6five

May 9, 2012, 2:34 AM

Post #16 of 21 (6729 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

I see there was never a response to this?

It works fine on ASRs but I am having the same issues on 12.4T on a 7206
that we want to use in small POPs.

Shaping just doesn't seem to work and the BBA config guide has no mention
of traffic shaping...

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax> wrote:

> Am 21.02.11 20:53, schrieb Gerald Krause:
> > Is there any other thing that I may have overlooked?
>
> Quick Question - do we need some kind of "Broadband License" to use this
> feature? We are running a standard ADVIPSERVICES IOS 12.2(33)SRE2, no
> special license and no ISG.
>
> --
> Gerald
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>


td_miles at yahoo

May 9, 2012, 4:55 AM

Post #17 of 21 (6749 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

We shape fine on 7200 with similar IOS.

#sh ver

Cisco IOS Software, 7200 Software (C7200-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.2(33)SRD1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc4)



#sh policy-map  qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
  Policy Map qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
    Class class-default
      Average Rate Traffic Shaping
      cir 455000 (bps)
      service-policy data-only-policy


#sh policy-map int virtual-access 620
 Virtual-Access620
 SSS session identifier 16 -

  Service-policy output: qos-pppoa-data-only-512k

    Class-map: class-default (match-any)
      9084 packets, 1425724 bytes
      30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
      Match: any
        9084 packets, 1425724 bytes
        30 second rate 1000 bps
      Queueing
      queue limit 113 packets
      (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
      (pkts output/bytes output) 9085/1544857
      shape (average) cir 455000, bc 1820, be 1820
      target shape rate 455000

      Service-policy : data-only-policy

        Class-map: class-critical-data (match-any)
          1613 packets, 358537 bytes
          30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
          Match: ip dscp cs6 (48)
            1613 packets, 358537 bytes
            30 second rate 0 bps
          Match: ip dscp cs3 (24)
            0 packets, 0 bytes
            30 second rate 0 bps
          Queueing
          queue limit 83 packets
          (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
          (pkts output/bytes output) 1614/254008
          bandwidth 74% (336 kbps)

        Class-map: class-scavenger (match-any)
          0 packets, 0 bytes
          30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
          Match: ip dscp cs1 (8)
            0 packets, 0 bytes
            30 second rate 0 bps
          Queueing
          queue limit 50 packets
          (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
          (pkts output/bytes output) 0/0
          bandwidth 1% (4 kbps)


        Class-map: class-default (match-any)
          7471 packets, 1067187 bytes
          30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
          Match: any
            7471 packets, 1067187 bytes
            30 second rate 1000 bps

          queue limit 28 packets
          (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
          (pkts output/bytes output) 7471/1290849





>________________________________
> From: Mauritz Lewies <mauritz [at] three6five>
>To: cisco-bba [at] puck
>Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2012 7:34 PM
>Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??
>
>
>I see there was never a response to this?
>
>
>It works fine on ASRs but I am having the same issues on 12.4T on a 7206 that we want to use in small POPs.
>
>
>Shaping just doesn't seem to work and the BBA config guide has no mention of traffic shaping...
>
>
>On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax> wrote:
>
>Am 21.02.11 20:53, schrieb Gerald Krause:
>>
>>> Is there any other thing that I may have overlooked?
>>
>>Quick Question - do we need some kind of "Broadband License" to use this
>>feature? We are running a standard ADVIPSERVICES IOS 12.2(33)SRE2, no
>>special license and no ISG.
>>
>>
>>--
>>Gerald
>>_______________________________________________
>>cisco-bba mailing list
>>cisco-bba [at] puck
>>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>>
>
>_______________________________________________
>cisco-bba mailing list
>cisco-bba [at] puck
>https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>
>


vaibhav.bagaria at bendigotelco

May 9, 2012, 5:03 PM

Post #18 of 21 (6754 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Hi Mauritz,

We had similar issues (application of service policy on virtual-template interfaces via RADIUS) with SRE release so we went back to 12.2(31)SB. Did not have a chance to test SRD but Tony has had some luck with it!

Hope that helps.

Vaibhav

From: cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Tony
Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2012 9:56 PM
To: Mauritz Lewies; cisco-bba [at] puck
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??

We shape fine on 7200 with similar IOS.

#sh ver
Cisco IOS Software, 7200 Software (C7200-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.2(33)SRD1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc4)


#sh policy-map qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
Policy Map qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
Class class-default
Average Rate Traffic Shaping
cir 455000 (bps)
service-policy data-only-policy

#sh policy-map int virtual-access 620
Virtual-Access620
SSS session identifier 16 -

Service-policy output: qos-pppoa-data-only-512k

Class-map: class-default (match-any)
9084 packets, 1425724 bytes
30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: any
9084 packets, 1425724 bytes
30 second rate 1000 bps
Queueing
queue limit 113 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 9085/1544857
shape (average) cir 455000, bc 1820, be 1820
target shape rate 455000

Service-policy : data-only-policy

Class-map: class-critical-data (match-any)
1613 packets, 358537 bytes
30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: ip dscp cs6 (48)
1613 packets, 358537 bytes
30 second rate 0 bps
Match: ip dscp cs3 (24)
0 packets, 0 bytes
30 second rate 0 bps
Queueing
queue limit 83 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 1614/254008
bandwidth 74% (336 kbps)

Class-map: class-scavenger (match-any)
0 packets, 0 bytes
30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: ip dscp cs1 (8)
0 packets, 0 bytes
30 second rate 0 bps
Queueing
queue limit 50 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 0/0
bandwidth 1% (4 kbps)


Class-map: class-default (match-any)
7471 packets, 1067187 bytes
30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: any
7471 packets, 1067187 bytes
30 second rate 1000 bps

queue limit 28 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 7471/1290849

________________________________
From: Mauritz Lewies <mauritz [at] three6five>
To: cisco-bba [at] puck
Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2012 7:34 PM
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??


I see there was never a response to this?

It works fine on ASRs but I am having the same issues on 12.4T on a 7206 that we want to use in small POPs.

Shaping just doesn't seem to work and the BBA config guide has no mention of traffic shaping...
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax<mailto:gk [at] ax>> wrote:
Am 21.02.11 20:53, schrieb Gerald Krause:
> Is there any other thing that I may have overlooked?
Quick Question - do we need some kind of "Broadband License" to use this
feature? We are running a standard ADVIPSERVICES IOS 12.2(33)SRE2, no
special license and no ISG.

--
Gerald
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck<mailto:cisco-bba [at] puck>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck<mailto:cisco-bba [at] puck>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


mauritz at three6five

May 10, 2012, 12:40 AM

Post #19 of 21 (6741 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Thanks I found 15.1S also works as 12.2 doesn't do all the features:

- 6VPE
- per-session shaping
- multicast-vpn
- pppoe

But my other problem is that the smallest sites have 3845s, which have usually tracked the 7200s for features. However I can't find an IOS that supports per-session shaping on the 3845s at all.
Guess we're rolling some more 7200s...

Mauritz Lewies

On 10 May 2012, at 2:03 AM, Vaibhav Bagaria wrote:

> Hi Mauritz,
>
> We had similar issues (application of service policy on virtual-template interfaces via RADIUS) with SRE release so we went back to 12.2(31)SB. Did not have a chance to test SRD but Tony has had some luck with it!
>
> Hope that helps.
>
> Vaibhav
>
> From: cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Tony
> Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2012 9:56 PM
> To: Mauritz Lewies; cisco-bba [at] puck
> Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??
>
> We shape fine on 7200 with similar IOS.
>
> #sh ver
> Cisco IOS Software, 7200 Software (C7200-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.2(33)SRD1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc4)
>
>
> #sh policy-map qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
> Policy Map qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
> Class class-default
> Average Rate Traffic Shaping
> cir 455000 (bps)
> service-policy data-only-policy
>
> #sh policy-map int virtual-access 620
> Virtual-Access620
> SSS session identifier 16 -
>
> Service-policy output: qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
>
> Class-map: class-default (match-any)
> 9084 packets, 1425724 bytes
> 30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
> Match: any
> 9084 packets, 1425724 bytes
> 30 second rate 1000 bps
> Queueing
> queue limit 113 packets
> (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
> (pkts output/bytes output) 9085/1544857
> shape (average) cir 455000, bc 1820, be 1820
> target shape rate 455000
>
> Service-policy : data-only-policy
>
> Class-map: class-critical-data (match-any)
> 1613 packets, 358537 bytes
> 30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
> Match: ip dscp cs6 (48)
> 1613 packets, 358537 bytes
> 30 second rate 0 bps
> Match: ip dscp cs3 (24)
> 0 packets, 0 bytes
> 30 second rate 0 bps
> Queueing
> queue limit 83 packets
> (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
> (pkts output/bytes output) 1614/254008
> bandwidth 74% (336 kbps)
>
> Class-map: class-scavenger (match-any)
> 0 packets, 0 bytes
> 30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
> Match: ip dscp cs1 (8)
> 0 packets, 0 bytes
> 30 second rate 0 bps
> Queueing
> queue limit 50 packets
> (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
> (pkts output/bytes output) 0/0
> bandwidth 1% (4 kbps)
>
>
> Class-map: class-default (match-any)
> 7471 packets, 1067187 bytes
> 30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
> Match: any
> 7471 packets, 1067187 bytes
> 30 second rate 1000 bps
>
> queue limit 28 packets
> (queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
> (pkts output/bytes output) 7471/1290849
>
>
> From: Mauritz Lewies <mauritz [at] three6five>
> To: cisco-bba [at] puck
> Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2012 7:34 PM
> Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??
>
>
> I see there was never a response to this?
>
> It works fine on ASRs but I am having the same issues on 12.4T on a 7206 that we want to use in small POPs.
>
> Shaping just doesn't seem to work and the BBA config guide has no mention of traffic shaping...
>
> On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax> wrote:
> Am 21.02.11 20:53, schrieb Gerald Krause:
> > Is there any other thing that I may have overlooked?
>
> Quick Question - do we need some kind of "Broadband License" to use this
> feature? We are running a standard ADVIPSERVICES IOS 12.2(33)SRE2, no
> special license and no ISG.
>
> --
> Gerald
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> cisco-bba mailing list
> cisco-bba [at] puck
> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba
>


vaibhav.bagaria at bendigotelco

May 10, 2012, 12:49 AM

Post #20 of 21 (6757 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Thanks Mauritz. I did not know 15.1s works as well. It will come in handy for us.

As for 28xx/38xx, we have had some luck with 12.4(15)T1 and per-session shaping. I realize that it quite old and it will have probably have poor support for 6vPE and other features. From memory, 15.0(1)M3-5 was successful as well but I am not a 100% certain.

IOS 12.4(15)T8 onwards seem to have issues with sessions getting stuck, requiring the tunnel to cleared.

Regards,
Vaibhav

From: Mauritz Lewies [mailto:mauritz [at] three6five]
Sent: Thursday, 10 May 2012 5:41 PM
To: Vaibhav Bagaria
Cc: 'Tony'; cisco-bba [at] puck
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??

Thanks I found 15.1S also works as 12.2 doesn't do all the features:

- 6VPE
- per-session shaping
- multicast-vpn
- pppoe

But my other problem is that the smallest sites have 3845s, which have usually tracked the 7200s for features. However I can't find an IOS that supports per-session shaping on the 3845s at all.
Guess we're rolling some more 7200s...

Mauritz Lewies

On 10 May 2012, at 2:03 AM, Vaibhav Bagaria wrote:


Hi Mauritz,

We had similar issues (application of service policy on virtual-template interfaces via RADIUS) with SRE release so we went back to 12.2(31)SB. Did not have a chance to test SRD but Tony has had some luck with it!

Hope that helps.

Vaibhav

From: cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck<mailto:cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck> [mailto:cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Tony
Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2012 9:56 PM
To: Mauritz Lewies; cisco-bba [at] puck<mailto:cisco-bba [at] puck>
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??

We shape fine on 7200 with similar IOS.

#sh ver
Cisco IOS Software, 7200 Software (C7200-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version 12.2(33)SRD1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc4)


#sh policy-map qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
Policy Map qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
Class class-default
Average Rate Traffic Shaping
cir 455000 (bps)
service-policy data-only-policy

#sh policy-map int virtual-access 620
Virtual-Access620
SSS session identifier 16 -

Service-policy output: qos-pppoa-data-only-512k

Class-map: class-default (match-any)
9084 packets, 1425724 bytes
30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: any
9084 packets, 1425724 bytes
30 second rate 1000 bps
Queueing
queue limit 113 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 9085/1544857
shape (average) cir 455000, bc 1820, be 1820
target shape rate 455000

Service-policy : data-only-policy

Class-map: class-critical-data (match-any)
1613 packets, 358537 bytes
30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: ip dscp cs6 (48)
1613 packets, 358537 bytes
30 second rate 0 bps
Match: ip dscp cs3 (24)
0 packets, 0 bytes
30 second rate 0 bps
Queueing
queue limit 83 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 1614/254008
bandwidth 74% (336 kbps)

Class-map: class-scavenger (match-any)
0 packets, 0 bytes
30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: ip dscp cs1 (8)
0 packets, 0 bytes
30 second rate 0 bps
Queueing
queue limit 50 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 0/0
bandwidth 1% (4 kbps)


Class-map: class-default (match-any)
7471 packets, 1067187 bytes
30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: any
7471 packets, 1067187 bytes
30 second rate 1000 bps

queue limit 28 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 7471/1290849

________________________________
From: Mauritz Lewies <mauritz [at] three6five<mailto:mauritz [at] three6five>>
To: cisco-bba [at] puck<mailto:cisco-bba [at] puck>
Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2012 7:34 PM
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??



I see there was never a response to this?

It works fine on ASRs but I am having the same issues on 12.4T on a 7206 that we want to use in small POPs.

Shaping just doesn't seem to work and the BBA config guide has no mention of traffic shaping...
On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax<mailto:gk [at] ax>> wrote:
Am 21.02.11 20:53, schrieb Gerald Krause:
> Is there any other thing that I may have overlooked?
Quick Question - do we need some kind of "Broadband License" to use this
feature? We are running a standard ADVIPSERVICES IOS 12.2(33)SRE2, no
special license and no ISG.

--
Gerald
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck<mailto:cisco-bba [at] puck>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck<mailto:cisco-bba [at] puck>
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba


frnkblk at iname

May 11, 2012, 5:03 PM

Post #21 of 21 (6718 views)
Permalink
Re: To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ?? [In reply to]

Does 15.1S support IPv6 PBR? I don't see it in the feature list, but just
checking.



Frank



From: cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck
[mailto:cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Mauritz Lewies
Sent: Thursday, May 10, 2012 2:41 AM
To: Vaibhav Bagaria
Cc: cisco-bba [at] puck
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??



Thanks I found 15.1S also works as 12.2 doesn't do all the features:



- 6VPE

- per-session shaping

- multicast-vpn

- pppoe



But my other problem is that the smallest sites have 3845s, which have
usually tracked the 7200s for features. However I can't find an IOS that
supports per-session shaping on the 3845s at all.

Guess we're rolling some more 7200s...



Mauritz Lewies



On 10 May 2012, at 2:03 AM, Vaibhav Bagaria wrote:





Hi Mauritz,



We had similar issues (application of service policy on virtual-template
interfaces via RADIUS) with SRE release so we went back to 12.2(31)SB. Did
not have a chance to test SRD but Tony has had some luck with it!



Hope that helps.



Vaibhav



From: cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck
[mailto:cisco-bba-bounces [at] puck] On Behalf Of Tony
Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2012 9:56 PM
To: Mauritz Lewies; cisco-bba [at] puck
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??



We shape fine on 7200 with similar IOS.



#sh ver

Cisco IOS Software, 7200 Software (C7200-ADVIPSERVICESK9-M), Version
12.2(33)SRD1, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc4)





#sh policy-map qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
Policy Map qos-pppoa-data-only-512k
Class class-default
Average Rate Traffic Shaping
cir 455000 (bps)
service-policy data-only-policy



#sh policy-map int virtual-access 620
Virtual-Access620
SSS session identifier 16 -

Service-policy output: qos-pppoa-data-only-512k

Class-map: class-default (match-any)
9084 packets, 1425724 bytes
30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: any
9084 packets, 1425724 bytes
30 second rate 1000 bps
Queueing
queue limit 113 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 9085/1544857
shape (average) cir 455000, bc 1820, be 1820
target shape rate 455000

Service-policy : data-only-policy

Class-map: class-critical-data (match-any)
1613 packets, 358537 bytes
30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: ip dscp cs6 (48)
1613 packets, 358537 bytes
30 second rate 0 bps
Match: ip dscp cs3 (24)
0 packets, 0 bytes
30 second rate 0 bps
Queueing
queue limit 83 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 1614/254008
bandwidth 74% (336 kbps)

Class-map: class-scavenger (match-any)
0 packets, 0 bytes
30 second offered rate 0000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: ip dscp cs1 (8)
0 packets, 0 bytes
30 second rate 0 bps
Queueing
queue limit 50 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 0/0
bandwidth 1% (4 kbps)


Class-map: class-default (match-any)
7471 packets, 1067187 bytes
30 second offered rate 1000 bps, drop rate 0000 bps
Match: any
7471 packets, 1067187 bytes
30 second rate 1000 bps

queue limit 28 packets
(queue depth/total drops/no-buffer drops) 0/0/0
(pkts output/bytes output) 7471/1290849




_____


From: Mauritz Lewies <mauritz [at] three6five>
To: cisco-bba [at] puck
Sent: Wednesday, 9 May 2012 7:34 PM
Subject: Re: [cisco-bba] To Shape or Police DSL Subscribers ??






I see there was never a response to this?



It works fine on ASRs but I am having the same issues on 12.4T on a 7206
that we want to use in small POPs.



Shaping just doesn't seem to work and the BBA config guide has no mention of
traffic shaping...

On Tue, Feb 22, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Gerald Krause <gk [at] ax> wrote:

Am 21.02.11 20:53, schrieb Gerald Krause:

> Is there any other thing that I may have overlooked?

Quick Question - do we need some kind of "Broadband License" to use this
feature? We are running a standard ADVIPSERVICES IOS 12.2(33)SRE2, no
special license and no ISG.


--
Gerald
_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba




_______________________________________________
cisco-bba mailing list
cisco-bba [at] puck
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-bba

Cisco bba RSS feed   Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded
 
 


Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads
 
  Web Applications & Managed Hosting Powered by Gossamer Threads Inc.