I read somewhere that a phone could generate up to 2.5x call traffic with its BIB. Multiplying by 3x would still be acceptable, I would think.
The 8000 is a burst threshold over the policed rate. It's always been 8000 in my experience, but probably only because no one knows enough to adjust it You cannot have an average and a max rate with voice. It's constant (excluding VAD). Video on the other hand is variable. If you are studying for your CCIE, I can share with you that Cisco has publicly stated they have some percentage of forgiveness. I.e., If they say 3 g711ulaw calls worth of bandwidth, and I enter 90*3=270, but you enter 93*3=279 (or even round up to 280), we would both get the points. What the percentage is, I don't recall. I want to say it was like 10%. So for every 100kbps, you can be plus or minus 10kbps. On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 1:00 PM abbas Wali <[email protected]> wrote: > Anthony, > > yes makes sense. but for the sake of argu. a single phone with even with > BIB how many max g711 streams it can get to. 3? if so, for a safe figure > can multiply by 3. > moreover, I dont really understand this statement ​police 90500 8000 exc > drop - as per docs, the actual transmission is 8k but on the avg. the max > is 90k ( plz correct if wrong) > > On 15 April 2015 at 18:10, Anthony Holloway < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> After reading the Medianet document, I'm certain they are just giving you >> an example, not a definitive answer nor the best practice. While 128kbps >> does police the port to a single g711ulaw call, it also allows for a little >> wiggle room, which I like. If you are looking for the absolute minimum >> bandwidth needed for a g711ulaw call, you could go lower than 128kbps, but >> you wouldn't gain anything. Don't forget that the BIB of the phone could >> cause more than a single call's worth of RTP to ingress the switch port, in >> which case your 128kbps would not be enough and you would have issues with >> things such as network recording or silent monitoring. >> >> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 9:19 AM abbas Wali <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> medianet is >>> >>> http://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/solutions/Enterprise/WAN_and_MAN/QoS_SRND_40/QoSCampus_40.html >>> >>> Vik's post >>> >>> http://www.collabcert.com/blog/qos/how-much-bandwidth-does-1-call-consume/ >>> >>> >>> On 15 April 2015 at 13:44, Anthony Holloway < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Can you link us to the sources in question? I personally need a little >>>> more context to go with your question. >>>> >>>> In general, policing a single g711ulaw call is around 93kbps, and >>>> rounding it to 100kbps still achieves the goal of policing a single call. >>>> And yes, a class based policer would police media and signaling separately. >>>> >>>> Also, I saw something on medianet at last year Cisco Live, but other >>>> than that, I'm clueless about medianet. I can't say if and how things >>>> changed once medianet came in to the picture. I'm sure Vik wasn't >>>> considering that either, based on the fact that he teaches CCIE Collab boot >>>> camps, and medianet is not a part of the blueprint. >>>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 4:22 AM abbas Wali <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Vik Malhi posted that for a successful g711 call >>>>> >>>>> HQSW(config-pmap-c)#police 90500 8000 exc drop ! 0 packet loss >>>>> >>>>> now, as per Ciso medianet 4 >>>>> >>>>> The VoIP and signaling traffic from the VVLAN can be policed to drop at >>>>> 128 kbps and 32 kbps, respectively (as any excessive traffic matching >>>>> this criteria would be indicative of network abuse) >>>>> >>>>> Question is 128 kbps supports 1 single voice stream of g711 OR if you go >>>>> with Vik, you need to multiply 90500 with the number of calls you need on >>>>> that port. I will assume that the sig is classified differently and >>>>> handled by diff policer on that port. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> many thanks >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> *Abbas Wali* >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> cisco-voip mailing list >>>>> [email protected] >>>>> https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Abbas Wali* >>> >> > > > -- > *Abbas Wali* >
_______________________________________________ cisco-voip mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/cisco-voip
