cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

QOS Priority on VLAN

dspjones
New Contributor

In the Ruckus FastIron Security Configuration Guide under the Configuring QoS priority for a VLAN

it says:

"Configuring QoS priority for a VLAN

NOTE
Configuring QoS priority for a VLAN is not applicable on the Ruckus ICX 7150."
 
So my question is - then how do I prioritize vlan 1000 (in this case) traffic above other vlans?
 
For example on an Aruba 2930m switch I have the following:
 

LOUNGE-sw# sh run vlan 1000

Running configuration:

vlan 1000
name "Network Management"
untagged 4-9,11-18,20,48
ip address 10.105.0.18 255.255.254.0
qos priority 7
exit

Love Aruba for simplifying stuff like that.

How do I achieve the same thing on a Ruckus ICX7150-48PF switch.  The switch is running router code if that matters and is currently on version 09.0.10eT213.

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

jdryan
RUCKUS Team Member

HI dspjones. 

Thank you for reaching out. 

Checked on this, while I did find that warning on the older release. 
however, on the router image on 9010e or higher revision, you should be able to make use of the ACL based
marking system.

given that. where the marking is happening is a layer 3 vlan or vlan with SVI. 
Below suggested method should work out well. 

> where Layer 2 vlan is defined and ports are associated 
> its Virtual interface (ve) is defined with the IP address for the subnet 
> extended acl is defined with the marking rule 
> and the same is called on the ve as inbound ACL 

 https://docs.commscope.com/bundle/fastiron-09010-securityguide/page/GUID-265CD435-9D7A-4AFB-9B4A-D4E...

Do note : 

when configuring the ACL you will find below options : 

802.1p-and-internal-marking       Mark packets with 802.1p priority value and set internal priority
802.1p-priority-marking                Mark packets with 802.1p priority value
802.1p-priority-matching              Match IPv4 / IPv6 packets with given 802.1p priority value
dscp-marking                                  Mark IPv4 / IPv6 packets with DSCP and COS parameters
dscp-matching                                Match IPv4 / IPv6 packets with given DSCP value
internal-priority-marking              Set internal queuing priority (traffic class)

if the task is to achieve the priority 7 marking : then the second option should do. 

if the task is to achieve the priority 7 marking and honor the same as well internally : the first option should do. 

 

Do let us know your thoughts on the same. 

Thanks and Regards

 

View solution in original post

5 REPLIES 5

jdryan
RUCKUS Team Member

HI dspjones. 

Thank you for reaching out. 

Checked on this, while I did find that warning on the older release. 
however, on the router image on 9010e or higher revision, you should be able to make use of the ACL based
marking system.

given that. where the marking is happening is a layer 3 vlan or vlan with SVI. 
Below suggested method should work out well. 

> where Layer 2 vlan is defined and ports are associated 
> its Virtual interface (ve) is defined with the IP address for the subnet 
> extended acl is defined with the marking rule 
> and the same is called on the ve as inbound ACL 

 https://docs.commscope.com/bundle/fastiron-09010-securityguide/page/GUID-265CD435-9D7A-4AFB-9B4A-D4E...

Do note : 

when configuring the ACL you will find below options : 

802.1p-and-internal-marking       Mark packets with 802.1p priority value and set internal priority
802.1p-priority-marking                Mark packets with 802.1p priority value
802.1p-priority-matching              Match IPv4 / IPv6 packets with given 802.1p priority value
dscp-marking                                  Mark IPv4 / IPv6 packets with DSCP and COS parameters
dscp-matching                                Match IPv4 / IPv6 packets with given DSCP value
internal-priority-marking              Set internal queuing priority (traffic class)

if the task is to achieve the priority 7 marking : then the second option should do. 

if the task is to achieve the priority 7 marking and honor the same as well internally : the first option should do. 

 

Do let us know your thoughts on the same. 

Thanks and Regards

 

Thanks for the response. I will try this and report back later. 

jdryan
RUCKUS Team Member

Sure !, Let us know how that goes. 

 

dspjones
New Contributor

Worked perfectly thanks.