Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Odd QOS scenario

    Looking at installing a 7 site, 250 user system. Customer is converting WAN to METRO-WAN, 10mpbs connection at ALL sites (Sweet!).

    Embarq will not prioritize traffic based off standard QOS methods, what they will do, is offer a second PORT on there router that will be prioritized. huh? That means we will have to split the Data/Voice traffic before hitting their system. Any suggestions? Anybody actually deal with any situation like this? We are considering adding some 1841's to route based off of some marker (either IP/Vlan/protocol...haven't decided yet).

    Charles

  • #2
    Sounds like you are on the right track. How much bandwidth are they provisioning for that port at each site?

    Do you guys perform a network assessment before you do installs like this? What about QOS testing?
    Last edited by jeffjines; 02-13-2008, 08:21 AM.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Charles
      Looking at installing a 7 site, 250 user system. Customer is converting WAN to METRO-WAN, 10mpbs connection at ALL sites (Sweet!).

      Embarq will not prioritize traffic based off standard QOS methods, what they will do, is offer a second PORT on there router that will be prioritized. huh? That means we will have to split the Data/Voice traffic before hitting their system. Any suggestions? Anybody actually deal with any situation like this? We are considering adding some 1841's to route based off of some marker (either IP/Vlan/protocol...haven't decided yet).

      Charles
      This is a point to multipoint solution (Layer 2 or Layer 3 from the carrier), right? Each site has 10 Mb?

      We've done a number of Layer 2 and Layer 3 carrier solutions (they are great), the key is having adequate bandwidth where traffic aggregates as it is a congestion point. Can you prioritize the priority of traffic outbound from the routers but you will not have control over how it goes inbound into the other points. Typically with larger carriers, they can prioritize in the cloud so that voice goes into the remote site first.

      Give me a buzz and I can explain it more. I don't see why they need to hand off a second port to offer the priority and how it will be any different in the cloud if they do that.

      Comment


      • #4
        Here are the details that I have:

        Quality of Service (QoS)
        QoS, standard 802.1p will give our customers the ability to mark their traffic with “p-bits” for prioritization over the Embarq Ethernet network.Embarq will assign a specific port on the switch to accept the customer’s priority marked traffic then Embarq will apply policing to the traffic. Today, Embarq offers Premium and Critical Layer 2 QoS, both are sold on a per Megabit basis and described below:

        Premium QoS is for delayed sensitive applications such as Voice and Video. ). Embarq will prioritize the customers subscribed bandwidth across the Ethernet backbone; prioritizing the Premium packets over ALL traffic in the network. Any packets sent over the customer’s subscribed bandwidth will be dropped.

        Critical QoS will support all other applications the customer may deem critical. ). Embarq will prioritize the customers subscribed bandwidth across the Ethernet backbone; prioritizing the Critical packets after the Premium traffic is sent and before ALL General LAN traffic in the network. Any traffic over the customer’s subscribed requirement will be sent across the network with the General LAN traffic.

        General LANNo prioritization of packets, customer’s traffic is sent through the network as it is received.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Charles
          Here are the details that I have:


          Who freakin uses 802.1p any more? Ugh. DSCP or at least TOS is much easier and more flexible.

          Comment


          • #6
            If they want the voice traffic tagged, why can't they just tag at the phone with 802.1Q?

            Comment

            Working...
            X