On 24 June 2015 at 21:05, Saku Ytti <[email protected]> wrote: > On 24 June 2015 at 22:29, Dan Peachey <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hey, > > > I thought the weights were determined by the %? The weights are then used > > to schedule the queues appropriately. Even if the queues are in excess, > > they should be weighted correctly? > > I tested this when Trio came out, and couldn't get QoS working, > because my AFB class was congesting my BE class fully. Solution was to > configure guaranteed-rate==shaping-rate, at which point the > percentages were honoured. This is actually what DPCE generation did > by default. I think the reason for grate being 0 by default, is > because trio supports additional level of shaping, in which use-case > it may make sense. > > As I recall you can oversub grate, but I can't recall testing it (For > my scenarios, majority of traffic is non-qos traffic, so it's not an > issue either way). > > Hi Saku,
I've run some tests and experienced the same thing as you. I had BE traffic affecting one of my other queues which was not oversubscribed and caused packet loss. Setting the guaranteed rate = shaping rate seemed to fix it. Seems odd to me that this needs to be done. Documentation I've read appears to suggest that in PIR mode (no guaranteed-rate set) the per-queue guarantee/transmit rate is calculated from the shaper rate and when a queue exceeds it's guaranteed rate it is in excess, but this doesn't appear to be the case and queues are always in excess. Thanks, Dan _______________________________________________ juniper-nsp mailing list [email protected] https://puck.nether.net/mailman/listinfo/juniper-nsp
