Cisco Switching/Routing :: 4500 Sup6E Priority Queue On Port-channel Member?
Mar 18, 2010
I am trying to implement priority queuing (LLQ) on a pair of 10GE links between a 4507 with Sup6E and a 4948 which are configured as an etherchannel. I am unable to configure a priority queue on the 4507. I am running into the following issues:
I want to have a priority queue for voice traffic and specify minimum bandwidth for a critical application. If I configure a class with the priority command it will not let me use the bandwidth command on another class unless the priority class is policed. If I try it without the police command I get the message "bandwidth kbps/percent command cannot co-exist with strict priority in the same policy-map ". If I add a police statement to the priority class then I don't get this error.
When I try to apply the resulting service-policy to the physical interface it says "% A service-policy with non-queuing actions should be attached to the port-channel associated with this physical port" and does not add the command to the config.
If I try to associate the same policy-map to the port-channel rather than the physical interface it says "% A service-policy with queuing actions can be attached in output direction only on physical ports" and does not add the command to the config.
All of the other interfaces on the 4500 are working OK. The trunks have auto qos voip trust configured and access ports are marking the critical application traffic.
The 4507 is running 12.2(44)SG1 EnterpriseK9. I don't have the luxury to upgrade blindly to fix the problem unless I can identify a specific bug that is causing the problem.
I configured Auto QoS on some access ports on two 4506-E (Sup 6E-L) and I wanted to apply the same generated config on the port channel/port channel members but it didn't work.
Ex: int gig1/3 service-policy input AutoQos-VoIP-Input-Cos-Policy % A service-policy with non-queuing actions should be attached to the port-channel associated with this physical port.
I configured the interfaces individually at L3 and could ping across each link Example:
4500 Switch 2: 6500 Switch 1 int t5/1 - int g3/17 1 Gig fiber link tore down config tried second set of interface int t6/1 - int g8/17 1 Gig fiber link Ping successful
We have a single 4500 connecting to two non-cisco devices. We need to enable port channelling or link aggregation between these two.The links are carrying mulitple vlans , hence are trunked and the ip address on either side is used for routing.
From each of the two non-cisco device, i am taking 2 ports each to connect to the 4500.On each non-cisco device side, two ports will bundle together as one aggregated interface (ae1) and the other will be called ae2.
my query is how do i do the configuration for etherchannel on the cisco 4500 side , as it will need two different Po's( port channels).I need a single ip address on both sides of port channel to be present for routing.
After opening up Solarwinds NPM, I noticed that a few of my interfaces had lots of discards (who knows how long it's been sets the counters were reset)
interface GigabitEthernet1/0/25description Etherchannel to MamaCassswitchport trunk encapsulation dot1qswitchport mode trunkswitchport nonegotiatepriority-queue outchannel-group 4 mode on
interface GigabitEthernet2/0/25description Etherchannel to MamaCassswitchport trunk encapsulation dot1qswitchport mode trunkswitchport nonegotiatepriority-queue outchannel-group 4 mode on
interface Port-channel4switchport trunk encapsulation dot1qswitchport mode trunkswitchport nonegotiate,It looks as if priority-queue was configured outbound on these interfaces, could this be the cause of the transmit discards which are now up to 79,835, I just reset the counters on the interfaces a little while ago.
I'm not the best in the world when it comes to QoS, we do have some VoIP phones, but they are only a specific network, and do not travel outside, since there are used mainly for VoIP training. I do know both interfaces are running the default of FIFO.
I have a Cisco Catalyst 2960 with IOS Release12.2(53)SE (because of a contract I can not update it) -> the release notes for this version describe the following:
When auto-QoS is enabled on the switch, priority queuing is not enabled. Instead, the switch uses shaped round robin (SRR) as the queuing mechanism. The auto-QoS feature is designed on each platform based on the feature set and hardware limitations, and the queuing mechanism supported on each platform might be different. There is no workaround. (CSCee22591)
My config is as follows:
interface FastEthernet0/1 switchport access vlan 200 switchport mode access srr-queue bandwidth share 10 10 60 20 priority-queue out mls qos trust dscp auto qos voip trust no cdp enable network-policy 1 spanning-tree portfastMy question now is:When the priority queue is not enabled with auto-qos because of the software bug is it nevertheless enabled with the additional priority-queue out command?
i have a 3560 connecting to a sp with limited bandwidth. i have one interface on the switch whose traffic i do not want to drop. i want this traffic to go into the high priority queue. i am not sure how this should be configured, but here is my best guess and my current qos configuration on the switch:
I have a Cisco 2960G switch and one of the ports was configured with srr-queue bandwidth limit 90 - I need to remove this bandwidth limiting from this interface. [code]
Why is it when I set the port priority for example to 8192 and I then do a show spanning-tree vlan 1 it shows as 8193, does it add the vlan number? so if it was vlan 10 it would be 8202?
We're testing the reference system shown in the figure below. System Description Four 2960 switches are used for transport;Equipment 1 and Equipment 2 exchange packets for synchronization;To reach synchronization Equipment 1 and 2 must exchange data with a very low jitter. 2960 Configuration details Four our test puprose, we're using 100Mbit/s ports (22 and 23) as trunk.In order to obtain minimum jitter We performed these configurations:We Enabled QoS;We Marked Synchronization packets with CoS 7 and DSCP 63;We marked other kind of traffic inserted in different ports) with CoS 0;We set "trust DSCP" on trunk ports;On the trunk ports we mapped traffic with CoS 7/DSCP 63 (and only this) on output queue 1;We enabled the expedite queue (priority-queue out). QuestionWith these settings we aim at forcing our synchronization packtes to precede other kind of traffic and go from Equipment 1 to Equipment 2 with minimum jitter.Unfortunately we experienced high jitter when both synchronization packets and other traffic are sent through the systems.
Trying to set-up a priority queue for Voice and Video traffic, below is the current ASA config. The WAN link is 6mb, trying to limit the Internet traffic to 4mb and save 2mb for the PQ, config belowTraffic just isn't hitting the PQ
priority-queue outside queue-limit 512 tx-ring-limit 200 ! class-map Video description Video match dscp af31
I have 3750 core/distribution switches with routing enabled in two offices connected with copper link and L3 port channel interfaces. NewOffice#2 has moved about 5 miles farther away from office#1 and I have to deploy new core/distribution switch connect it to old core#2 via F.O and move all access switches with it. Old core will stay in old #2 offices as a bridge between office#1 and new office#2 Office#1core<->copper (Ethernet) <->oldoffice#2core<->f.o. <->new office#2core How I should configure port channels ports on oldoffice#2 core to act as bridge between office#1 core/dist and newoffice#2 core/dist without changing anything else (ip, etc) on whole network
I have 2 Cisco 6509 switches linked together via single Fibre as a trunk.I want to change this to a port channel where I will add another 3 fibre ports to the port channel but what order do I do this to minimise any disruption.
1-Configure PortChannel and add the 3 new ports, this will bring up the Port Channel but what effect will this have on traffic currently going over the single Trunk link? Will spanning tree go mad, how will switches react?
2-Convert existing Trunk link to Portchannel then add in new ports to PortChannel, I guess in doing this there will be a small hit on traffic as it changes to a port channel.
We have 2 6513's that are linked via 2 10 gig interfaces, using an LACP channel.I received an alert this aft stating that the far 6513 was unreachable and the port channel int PO3 had gone down, the 2 10 gig interfaces had also gone down on either side. 5 mins later PO3 had resestablished itself and has been fine since. [code]
We are running nexus 5018 in our DC.What is the difference betwen "channel-group 214 mode active" and " channel-group 216" Any difference?.. because i have problem with this config we are going build a server config?
We have problem with porth channel down.
5K# sh int po71 port-channel71 is down (No operational members) vPC Status: Down, vPC number: 71 [packets forwarded via vPC peer-link]
i just want to ask whether i should do some configurations or not on my cisco switch 4500 L3 regarding the error of 500 invalid port command when host try to access FTP active on to FTP server, i just did static route on gig interface with no switchport mode to that host network, all traffic type was allowed except the FTP with active mode?
I am building a new network and intended on using the min-link feature on my port-channels between a 3750-X series switch and Nexus 4k.
However reading further into this it seems this feature is only supported on higher end models. I cannot find any reference to the min-links feature in the 3750-X configuration guide. Is this an available feature?
The 3750-X model is WS-C3750X-24T-L running IOS 12.2(55)SE3 IP Services
My thoughts is that the is only an LACP supported feature so I may not see the command until I have entered an LACP specific command on the port-channel but unfortunately I do not have a 3750X to verify this on at present.
We have one 3825 router used as voice gateway. For redudancy, we want to connect it to two different switches which has STP and HSRP running. Can I create a port-channel with two Giga interfaces in 3825 and connect to two different switches? Should I configure port channel in switch with only one port in each port-channel? I know server can be connected to different switches with NIC teaming. I just want to mimic that kind of setup. I did one time for port-channel in 3825, but it was connected to a stacked 3750X. So it's different case now.
I am trying to configure port-channel from one switch to two switchs, and only one interface of each switches make part of the port channel.Cisco IOS Software, ME380x Software (ME380x-UNIVERSALK9-M), Version 12.2(52)EY4, RELEASE SOFTWARE (fc1) [code]
I have a pair of 6500's setup with VSS and there is currently only one link between then. However one end of the link is on Po10 and the other end is on Po25. If I move the Po25 over to Po10, will things break? It seems to be working fine now. I'm about to add a second link and I'm concerned about the current configuration. It makes more sense to me to have both ends of the same link on the same port-channel ID. I've seen documentation which states otherwise however.
interface Port-channel10 no switchport no ip address
I am using 3560.IP rouitng is being turned off on this.Curious to know if I will create etherchannel or port channel.I think etherchannel.Correct me if I am wrong.On connecting switches I have vlan10,20,30 to be allowed.I am sure I need to allow these all vlan in 10,20,30 which are on the trunk port on each side switch.Post that will add channel-port lacp and make it in active mode.Is that correct.This way traffic will be load-balanced/aggregated on minimum 2 ports who are the part of this.
Here's what I'm trying to do. We are having new storage servers installed that will be using NFS. I'm being told that they need to have their connections port channeled. Right now, the servers have connections to 2 different 3750s for HA. Is it possible to configure a port channel between these 2 connections?
I have an inquiry about a configuration I deploy in a C2960 switch. I have configured a ether channel with 8 ports, the load balanced method is source mac address. The bundling protocol is LACP.
I have found the ether channel is not balanced as I expect. One of the eight interfaces is congested.
We have a switch that, when configuring auto qos on and edge port facing video equipment, the upstream port channel drops. I was wondering if no auto qos would have to be configured on the member ports of the port channel prior to enabling auto qos on any other ports.
I have a Cisco 6500 series switch with VS-C6509E-S720-10G ,I have two redundant supervisors between two chassis on the LAN with no add-on line cards ?
I need to know if I can use the redundant supervisor 10 Gb uplinks to form a layer-2 Port channel between the two 6500 switches as i do not want to use want to keep the port idle additionally I need more bandwidth between the two switches for my server farm?
I have 2 cisco 6500 in a VSS configuration , All of my Lan access switches are Stack switches and every Stack is connected to the VSS in a Port-channel so basically this is a loop free environment with no blocked ports .As a best practice I left STP in the Background (mstp)which enhanced cisco features to STP should I configure on the Aggregator (6500-VSS) and on the Access switches ?
Because of my topology I dont see the need in configuring most features like Uplink Fast and Backbone Fast but I have configured Loop Guard in addition to UDLD on the 6500 Aggregation Switches (on the port-channels).On the access ports I have configured portfast , bpduguard and guard root (seems a little pointless to configure the two...)
1.should I Leave UDLD on and get rid of LoopGuard and configure Guard root instead ? since LoopGuard cannot be configured with Guard Root.
2.should I configure GuardRoot on access ports if I already have BpduGuard on them ?
3.Is there anything I need to configure on the physicall interface or is everything configured on the port-channel since STP reguards port- channel as a single interface ?
I am trying to create a port channel between HP servers (4 nic) and two nexus 2k. The server side its a single team with 803.2ad fault taulerence and on the nexus side it have created two port channel (port channel 1 for nexus 2k1 and port channel 2 for nexus 2k2) and made them ACTIVE (channel group mode active)
But when i add a another server on different ports and port channel them the same way as the above server on nexus 2k1 and nexus 2k2, the first server stops pinging. so i have to sht down the first port channel and reopen them - then it works, however it says NO NETWORK ACCESS on the servers (running windows 2008). the only way is to reboot the server i cant be doing this on a production network.
