On 10/28/2015 9:06 AM, [email protected] wrote:
2015-10-28 13:37 skrev Mark Tinka:
On 28/Oct/15 14:27, Dan Brisson wrote:
I'm hoping to get some feedback on how to limit/shape bandwidth for
customers in a co-lo environment. Currently customers are connected
to Cisco 3750 switches at either 10, 100, or 1Gig depending on what
they purchase for commodity Internet bandwidth. The 10 and 100 is
fine but customers are allowed to purchase in increments between
100Meg and 1Gig. So because of that, if a customer purchased 300Mb/s,
it would be nice to limit their physical gig port to capping out at
300Mb/s.
I know the 3750 line has some shaping capability, but I'm not sure it
can do what I want. And further I'm not sure if it has the buffer
space to do what I want.
Can someone confirm or deny the capabilities the Catalyst 3750 line
with respect to this situation. And if the 3750 cannot do what I
need, what should I look at in the Cisco line? Would the ME line of
switches be more appropriate.
The only Cisco switch I am aware of that can do egress policing is the
ME3600X, ASR920, and whatever runs the SUP-2T (SUP-2T not tested, just
based on what others have said).
Egress shaping is, IIRC, supported on some of Cisco's desktop switches,
but as you say, the limited buffers on these platforms may create some
interesting situations in the field.
I believe reasonably recent desktop switches from Cisco will support
ingress policing, but suggest you check this out before you buy.
Mark.
Does each customer have its own VLAN or do they share VLANs? Do you
care if the customer uses more capacity internally or only towards the
Internet? Catalyst switches can do ingress policing which would mean
outbound traffic if you do it on the customer port. It also has egress
shaping but it uses an algorithm called SRR which is quite different
to the policy-maps that are used on routers. You could do ingress
policing on a trunk port but it's quite convoluted to be honest.
Like Mark said you could either move up to some more advanced switch
such as 4500 or 6880 etc or keep things as is but invest in more
intelligence at the edge with a box like ASR920 or similar.
Regards,
Daniel
Each customer does have its own VLAN. And the only concern is to/from
the Internet. The customer's routing interface is actually a
subinterface on an ASR1002 (the ASR1002 has dot1q tagged interface
connected to the 3750 with a tag for each customer's vlan). Maybe a
policy applied to that interface is a better spot? I guess that would
come down to the policing/shaping capabilities of the ASR1002 platform.
Thanks!
-dan
_______________________________________________
cisco-nsp mailing list [email protected]
https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-nsp
archive at http://puck.nether.net/pipermail/cisco-nsp/
