Depending on platform, all of this may be done in hardware. Doesn't the PFC in a 6500 handle this? If so, it would not be "CPU" intensive at all...
Fred Reimer - CCNA Eclipsys Corporation, 200 Ashford Center North, Atlanta, GA 30338 Phone: 404-847-5177 Cell: 770-490-3071 Pager: 888-260-2050 NOTICE; This email contains confidential or proprietary information which may be legally privileged. It is intended only for the named recipient(s). If an addressing or transmission error has misdirected the email, please notify the author by replying to this message. If you are not the named recipient, you are not authorized to use, disclose, distribute, copy, print or rely on this email, and should immediately delete it from your computer. -----Original Message----- From: Dom [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2003 10:33 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Which is more CPU intensive? [7:72792] I would guess that using policing to set the dscp is more intensive as all the token bucket counters need to be taken into account. This is just my guess though. Best regards, Dom Stocqueler SysDom Technologies Visit our website - www.sysdom.org -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 23 July 2003 13:57 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Which is more CPU intensive? [7:72792] Which is more CPU intensive. Using set ip dscp with CBWFQ or policing to mark traffic dscp values with CBWFQ? Muhtari Message Posted at: http://www.groupstudy.com/form/read.php?f=7&i=72819&t=72792 -------------------------------------------------- FAQ, list archives, and subscription info: http://www.groupstudy.com/list/cisco.html Report misconduct and Nondisclosure violations to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
