No relevant resource is found in the selected language.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Read our privacy policy>

Reminder

To have a better experience, please upgrade your IE browser.

upgrade

FAQ-Why traffic policy car under one interface is not precius in bidirectional test

Publication Date:  2012-07-27 Views:  51 Downloads:  0
Issue Description
Q:
Why traffic policy car under one interface is not precius in bidirectional test?
      
Alarm Information
Null
Handling Process

A:

#
traffic classifier test
 if-match acl 10001
#
traffic behavior 1m
 car cir 1000 cbs 100000 green pass yellow remark red discard
#
traffic policy 1m
 classifier test behavior 1m precedence 0
#
interface Ethernet1/0/0
 undo shutdown
 ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.252
#
interface Ethernet1/0/1
 undo shutdown
 ip address 10.2.2.1 255.255.255.252
 traffic-policy 1m inbound
 traffic-policy 1m outbound
#
traffic policy commit
We use PRTG monitor interface Ethernet1/0/1, the inboud traffic is 0.5M and outbound traffic is 0.5M.
If using traffic policy 1m under ethernet 1/0/1 for inboud and outbound, traffic policy car is shared for inbound and outbound.
Solution is inbound and outbound use different name of traffic-policy for 1M traffic limit.
Configuration of NE40 VRP5.30
#
acl number 10001
 rule ip
#
traffic classifier test
 if-match acl 10001
#
traffic behavior 1m
 car cir 1000 cbs 100000 green pass yellow remark red discard
#
traffic behavior 1m_2
 car cir 1000 cbs 100000 green pass yellow remark red discard
#
traffic policy 1m
 classifier test behavior 1m precedence 0
#
traffic policy 1m_2
 classifier test behavior 1m_2 precedence 0
#
interface Ethernet1/0/0
 undo shutdown
 ip address 10.1.1.1 255.255.255.252
#
interface Ethernet1/0/1
 undo shutdown
 ip address 10.2.2.1 255.255.255.252
 traffic-policy 1m inbound
 traffic-policy 1m_2 outbound
#
traffic policy commit
      

Root Cause
Null
Suggestions
Null

END