v1.4.5rcX Bug Reports and Comments

[mike99]

Are you shure that it was implemented in rc6 ? Seem like not. Testing it on a WS-12-250AC and it seem like it's the same QoS config from 1.4.4.

[Eric Stern]

[mike99]

I miss it. Thanks Eric, I will look again tomorrow.

Also, could you explain why choose a queue by port ?

I don't see how it make sense since Vitesse chip has 8 queues per port.

[Eric Stern]

I mostly copied the UI from another manufacturers switch, and they had that option. I suppose if you had a voip phone or something on a port you might want to give it higher priority than other ports.

[mike99]

So, if I understand well, it's the default queue so none matching paquets (paquets that don't match any rules like DSCP 48 = queue 6) will match this queue instead of the queue 0. Right ?

[Eric Stern]

Yes.

[mike99]

Now, the problem I see is that you can set PCP and DSCP value at 2 places, in the PCP or DSCP mapping and in the rules. It's reflected in the config:

[*] "QoS_DSCP_Mapping": [
...
{
"DSCP": 10,
"Queue": "4"
}
...
"QoSRules": [
{
"Type": "DSCP",
"Value": "10",
"Queue": "6"
}
... [/*]

Personnally, I would remove the PCP and DSCP mapping and only leave rules.

Also, range for DSCP and port would be nice. Subnet for src IP could be a other interesting option.
Exemple:
DSCP 24,26 queue 5
DSCP 46,48-55 queue 6
etc.

[Eric Stern]

I'll remove the mappings and add ranges for DSCP and PCP.

You already can optionally add a subnet to the src IP.

[mike99]

Thanks Eric, that great. I hope to have more time next week to test the QoS.

[ste]

Just configuring a Metrolink-Link using *one* Netonix Switch. There seem to be a loop protection mechanism which makes both unavailable. This even happens doing both Metrolinqs in different Vlans.