Matt, One quick question.
qos map VOIP 10
match dscp 46
match dscp 26
priority unlimited
That is correct right?
What is it was like this.
qos map VOIP 10
match dscp 46 26***------ (does this mean that the packet has to have 46 and 26?
prioirty unlimited
They both function the same, as a logical OR. From your examples, if the packet has either DSCP 46 or DSCP 26 it will match.
match dscp 46 26***------ (does this mean that the packet has to have 46 and 26?
A packet can only have one DSCP value. This method of listing multiple values on the same line works as a logical OR, and can be useful though if you need to have the packet match multiple conditions like a VLAN ID in addition to different DSCP values. The qos map would need to be changed from the default of match-any (logical OR) to match-all (logical AND). This is done by adding the match-all keyword to the end of the qos map statement, and will require a packet to match all of the vertically listed conditions. For example the output below would require a packet have a VLAN ID of 23 AND a DSCP of either 26 or 46:
!
qos map MAP 10 match-all
match vlan 23
match dscp 26 46
!
Thanks,
Matt
They both function the same, as a logical OR. From your examples, if the packet has either DSCP 46 or DSCP 26 it will match.
match dscp 46 26***------ (does this mean that the packet has to have 46 and 26?
A packet can only have one DSCP value. This method of listing multiple values on the same line works as a logical OR, and can be useful though if you need to have the packet match multiple conditions like a VLAN ID in addition to different DSCP values. The qos map would need to be changed from the default of match-any (logical OR) to match-all (logical AND). This is done by adding the match-all keyword to the end of the qos map statement, and will require a packet to match all of the vertically listed conditions. For example the output below would require a packet have a VLAN ID of 23 AND a DSCP of either 26 or 46:
!
qos map MAP 10 match-all
match vlan 23
match dscp 26 46
!
Thanks,
Matt
I branched this post to a new discussion as it would be a good reference for others on its own unrelated to the previous question.
Thanks,
Matt