- Access exclusive content
- Connect with peers
- Share your expertise
- Find support resources
01-29-2019 04:11 AM - edited 01-29-2019 06:39 AM
Hi Community,
I am having some queries about PA qos.
My requirment is for example, i need to control upload in following scenario
For achiving same ,
i created two qos profiles with class 4 ( default class for all traffic, i dont have any qos policy).
Applied it on egress interface ( connecting to ISP).
01-30-2019 06:32 AM
You can control maximum and guarantee for both clear and tunneled, but if both are consuming more than is available in total, they will be treated equally and anything that falls outside of their guarantee will basically become 'first come first serve' (this is more nuanced as the individual classes and their priorities will still be applied, as you propose)
The individual priorities will only be applied when there is a complete saturation condition. As long as there is bandwidth available the packets will be processed fifo. You will want to give yourcleartext packets 'real-time' and the tunneled packets something lower as there liest the biggest difference the moment your bandwidth is fully consumed (the real-time queue has preference over all other priorities)
01-29-2019 01:11 PM
I'm pretty sure PA's implementation of QoS doesn't get this in depth to allow this fine of control; I could be wrong but I don't think this will work how you want it to.
01-30-2019 06:32 AM
You can control maximum and guarantee for both clear and tunneled, but if both are consuming more than is available in total, they will be treated equally and anything that falls outside of their guarantee will basically become 'first come first serve' (this is more nuanced as the individual classes and their priorities will still be applied, as you propose)
The individual priorities will only be applied when there is a complete saturation condition. As long as there is bandwidth available the packets will be processed fifo. You will want to give yourcleartext packets 'real-time' and the tunneled packets something lower as there liest the biggest difference the moment your bandwidth is fully consumed (the real-time queue has preference over all other priorities)
01-30-2019 10:17 PM - edited 01-30-2019 10:18 PM
Thanks @reaper for your valuable input,
do i have any option to automatically reduce tunnel bandwidth if clear traffic is higher if there is no conjuction also?.
i am worried that even if i reduce the interface speed to 50 mbps(dont think so, because i am seeing 10/100/1G..options), hope it will only stops sending bits in every clock cycle instead it will send accordingly so that it can match speed. in this case also i cannot indirectly generate a conjuction.
Could you please advice if there is any option to achive the requirment?
01-31-2019 04:11 AM
hi @Abdul_Razaq
no, both channels will use the bandwidth that is not in their guarantee
the 'shared' bandwithspace cannot be throttled to favor one channel over the other, you can only give one class a higher priority vs the other
you could try setting a lower maximum for the tunneled traffic so it is stopped from trying to take more than what is available in total which will allow for more room for cleartext to take up
Click Accept as Solution to acknowledge that the answer to your question has been provided.
The button appears next to the replies on topics you’ve started. The member who gave the solution and all future visitors to this topic will appreciate it!
These simple actions take just seconds of your time, but go a long way in showing appreciation for community members and the LIVEcommunity as a whole!
The LIVEcommunity thanks you for your participation!