The MPLS-OPS Archive

Cell Relay Retreat>MPLS-OPS Archive>month:2001-Mar> msg00144



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]  
  [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index][Subject Index]

Re: CoS (QoS+ mpls)

  • From: Rudy Avendaņo <avendano@alpha.telecom-co.net>
  • Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 16:37:04 -0500
  • Cc: <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
  • Resent-Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2001 18:02:59 -0500
  • To: "Ta,Phong G." <pta@mitre.org>, Rudy Avendaņo <avendano@alpha.telecom-co.net>

I have thought to use no synchronization command. I think so.
Rudy Avendaņo

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ta,Phong G." <pta@mitre.org>
To: "Rudy Avendaņo" <avendano@alpha.telecom-co.net>
Cc: <mpls-ops@mplsrc.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 22, 2001 4:24 PM
Subject: Re: CoS (QoS+ mpls)


> Rudy,
>
> For the backbone, you may want to use CBWFQ.  It provides better control
> than flow-based WFQ, and it intergrates better with WRED since you have
> already classified traffic at the ingress by CAR.  Just a quick
> question, how do you overcome synchronization problem in the backbone if
> you use IBGP as IGP?
>
> Phong
>
> Rudy Avendaņo wrote:
> >
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > This is my question,
> >
> > If  I'm going to configure IBGP in my backbone that is conformed by 6
> > routers. I have thought congurate MPLS plus any mechanism for QoS. For
> > inbound traffic I'm going to applying CAR (Committed Access Rate), and
for
> > traffic in the backbound I would configurate WRED + WFQ. Besides, I'm
> > thinking to implement VPN with MP-BGP. What do you think about this?? It
is
> > a good solution to guaranty QoS for Differents Services.
> >
> > Thanks for your opinions and suggestions
> >
> > Rudy Avendaņo
> > TELECOM
>
> --
> Phong Ta        The MITRE Corporation
> Phone:  703-883-6787    1820 Dolley Madison Blvd., MS:W650
> Fax:    703-883-7142    McLean, VA  22102

-------
The MPLS-OPS Mailing List
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:  http://www.mplsrc.com/mplsops.shtml
Archive: http://www.mplsrc.com/mpls-ops_archive.shtml