Hi, I hava a switch Support 802.d layer two based CoS (can set each port for 0-7 priorty. in fact it map to four queues e.g 0-2 ->q1, 3-4
-->q2, 5-->q3, and 6-7->q4 and it is weight round robin 10:5:2:1
->q4:q3:q2:q1)The question is that suppose i have two port (p1 and p2)using line speed send diff traffic go to p3 and set p1 to 7 and p2 to 5. and all ports are same line speed without flow control.
Does p3 drop total half packets and 1/3 from p1 and 2/3 from p2 (10:5)?
if p3 does not congestion, does this CoS still work ?
if it connect another switch via trunk, does this CoS still work?
Does incoming tranffic add tag when it going to source port in the switch and take off this tag when it going out of dest. port?
In article , wld wrote: :I hava a switch Support 802.d layer two based CoS
:if it connect another switch via trunk, does this CoS still work?
Yes, but the other switch might have different ideas about what the priorities mean.
:Does incoming tranffic add tag when it going to source port in the :switch and take off this tag when it going out of dest. port?
Yes.
:What is diff. between QoS and CoS?
formatting link
CoS and QoS are ways of managing data traffic on a network. Quality of Service (QoS) refers to the end-to-end delivery of information - for example, data, voice and video - in real-time, reliably, consistently and securely across the network, meeting agreed service level assurances. QoS can vary by the type of traffic being transported. For example, speech quality is sensitive to even slight delays, while data - e-mails, for example - is more tolerant. Class of Service (CoS) is a way of categorising traffic, enabling prioritisation by type. Each CoS can be offered different bandwidth or other parameters appropriate to the Qos required for the traffic type.
In other words, CoS is about figuring out what the priority of particular traffic should be, and QoS is about getting traffic to the other end with priority appropriate for the classification.
Do you mean that you are assigning *frame* priority based on the arrival port? Remember, "priority" in 802.1D means the priority assigned to a
*frame*. Assigning frame priority based on arrival port seems odd to me. It implies that *all* frames arriving on some port are "more important" than *all* frames arriving on some other port. If the intent is to give particular *users* higher priority, the assignment should rather be based on MAC address (not port), so that the priority assignment "moves" with the station.
Nonetheless, let's continue with your hypothetical situation (perhaps it is a school assignment?).
You have four classes of service on each output port. This is fairly common.
Is the weighting being performed on a *frame* basis (i.e., 10 frames, 5 frames, 2 frames, 1 frame) or on a *byte* basis (e.g., 100K bytes, 50K bytes, 20K bytes, 10K bytes)? Either is possible, and the resulting traffic will vary. For simplicity, I will assume that the weighting is on a byte basis; if all frames are assumed to be the same length (bad assumption in practice), there is no difference between the two schemes.
By the way be *very careful* pronouncing "four queue system" in English! :^)
What do you mean by "diff traffic"? Differentiated service? Different?
So your scenario has two steady-state, wire-speed frame streams, one at priority 7 (highest class of service) and one at priority 5 (next highest class of service) targeted to a single output port.
Using the weightings you provided, frames arriving from port 1 will consume 10/15 (two-thirds) of the capacity of port 3, and frames arriving from port 2 will consume 5/15 (one-third) of the capacity. Assuming that this situation lasts "forever" (i.e., steady-state), and the switch has finite buffers, 1/3 of the frames arriving on port 1, and
2/3 of the frames arriving on port 2 will ultimately be discarded.
"Work" for what purpose? Obviously, if the purpose is to forward all of the frames, no class-of-service scheme "works" if the offered load exceeds the switch or port capacity in the steady-state. I discuss this problem at length in Chapter 13 of "The Switch Book". Priority provides a means to ride-through transient overload conditions without adversely impacting the performance of time-sensitive applications; it cannot resolve a situation where the steady-state demands placed on either the switch or a link exceeds the capacity of the switch or link.
Same answer as above.
I don't understand this question. A tag-aware switch should tag untagged frames for transmission on a "tagged" output port; similarly it should strip the tag from received frames when transmitting them onto an "untagged" output port.
That all depends on how you define QoS and CoS; many people use different (and conflicting) definitions, so you get different answers. This is also discussed at length in Chapter 13.
-- Rich Seifert Networks and Communications Consulting 21885 Bear Creek Way (408) 395-5700 Los Gatos, CA 95033 (408) 228-0803 FAX
I think ATM introduced some level of rigor in the definition of CoS and QoS, but I agree that these terms are not typically used with any standard meaning.
CoS or "service category" in ATM would be things like constant bit rate, variable bit rate (real time), variable bit rate (non real time), available bit rate, unspecified bit rate, and guaranteed frame rate. So it's a more or less qualitative description of the type of virtual circuit the calling party wants to set up. At the two extremes would be constant bit rate to emulate a dedicated leased line, and uspecified bit rate to emulate a best effort packet-switched network.
Traffic descriptors, such as peak cell rate, sustained cell rate, and minimum cell rate, quantify the type of connection the calling party wants to set up. For some classes, a traffic descriptor might not be applicable. For example, in constant bit rate connections, peak and sustained cell rates would be the same.
QoS is a quantitative specification of link quality, applied to the specific connection the calling party is trying to set up. The basic parameters would be end to end latency, jitter, and cell loss rate. For example, a constant bit rate connection might ask for very low jitter and low latency, to better emulate a dedicated line, but might not be too concerned with cell loss rate. If this setup is for a voice link, an occasional glitch in a voice connection might be acceptable, if this level of loss allows the network to provide a constant bit rate link. An unspecified bit rate connection would not be too concerned about QoS parameters, because it is only trying to emulate best effort service.
In IP, Differentiated Services (RFC 2475) works to introduce some of these different types of services in IP sessions. I don't think there's any such rigor or standard definitions implied in the use of the priority levels with IEEE 802.1Q, however.
Cabling-Design.com Forums website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.