Hi Paul, also consider the access rate (100Mbps) is much higher than your CIR (some 4Mbps); this means that TCP tests will perform badly unless you introduce some sort of egress shaping instead of that brutal rate-limiting which just drops non-conforming packets. Rate-limiting and policing are generally suitable egress only for UDP and multicast traffic. They are also suitable ingress to avoid customers pumping too much traffic at the edges (in which case, again if the access rate of the medium is higher than the CIR, they should be shaping outbound).
Cheers, Paolo On Thu, Dec 20, 2007 at 03:46:05PM -0500, Paul Stewart wrote: > Can anyone tell me why this doesn't work? We have this implemented in > dozens of other locations and it works fine... > > Cisco 2621 router > > interface FastEthernet0/0.10 > description Office LAN > encapsulation dot1Q 10 > ip address 216.168.114.57 255.255.255.248 > rate-limit input 4200000 2100 2100 conform-action transmit exceed-action > drop > rate-limit output 4200000 2100 2100 conform-action transmit exceed-action > drop > > > When we run tests, we can barely get 200Kb/s up or down....?? > > Thanks, > > Paul > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.17.5/1190 - Release Date: 12/19/2007 > 7:37 PM > > > _______________________________________________ > cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] > https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp > archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/ _______________________________________________ cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
