[no subject]

Scott M, do you think the Microflow policer you referred to can limit =
traffic based on individual flows within a defined range (acl)?

        -=3DVandy=3D-

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott McGrath [mailto:mcgrath () fas harvard edu]
Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 12:53 PM
To: Vandy Hamidi
Cc: Jack Bates; Andy Dills; prue; nanog () merit edu
Subject: Re: RATE-Limiting and=20



Depends on the equipment you have installed.  If you are running a
65xx/76xx if you are running mls with full flow masks you can set up a
microflow policer which would allow you to mark or drop traffic on a per
flow basis

                            Scott C. McGrath

On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Vandy Hamidi wrote:

> Excellent point.  It does depend on the traffic type.
> Though I don't like to complicated my configs, you can always use CAR =
(cisco rate limiting) through an ACL to protect against the file =
transfer from the core servers issue you referred to below.  It can make =
sure a high bandwidth xfer won't suck up all your available B/W.
> Does anyone out there know how to limit B/W based on Flow or =
individual sessions?  Or even just source (where source is random).  For =
example, a CAR where each IP source gets no more than X% of B/W (still =
allowing bursts if bandwidth is available).  I think some QOS tagging =
and queuing would have to be involved.
>       -=3DVandy=3D-
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jack Bates [mailto:jbates () brightok net]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2003 4:43 AM
> To: Andy Dills
> Cc: Vandy Hamidi; prue; nanog () merit edu
> Subject: Re: Newbie network upgrade question, apologies in advance to
> NANOG
>
>
> Andy Dills wrote:
> > Yes, but the original poster was dealing with DS3s connected to =
different
> > NAPs, which is why the packet out-of-order issue can be significant.
>
> I'd say that a more significant issue is customer throughput. The nice
> aspect of per conn is that it not only tends to keep a decent load
> balance, it also limits bandwidth hogs from saturating all circuits.
> This of course depends on your desired result. An example in my case =
is
> my helpdesk. They are off two t1's with dsl and dialup customers. I'd
> prefer them not to tank both t1's when transfering files to and from =
the
> core servers.
>
> -Jack