A network architect has created a quality of service (QoS) for an HP 5900 Series switch that uses
four traffic classes. Class of Service (CoS) 5 for voice traffic. CoS 4 for Video traffic. And CoS 0 for
everything else. The switch ports implement strict priority (SP) queuing.
What would be an advantage of enabling weighted fair queuing (WFQ) instead of SP?
A.
When congestion occurs, the port will randomly drop traffic in the CoS 3 and CoS 0 queues,
preventing TCP synchronization that increase congestion
B.
The architect can ensure that voice traffic is always forwarded before bandwidth intensive video
traffic
C. applications from starving out other applications entirely
The architect can guarantee specific bandwidth to each class but prevent video an SAP
D.
When congestion occurs, the port will buffer traffic in lower priority queues rather than drop it
immediately as it does with SP queuing
Hi
what is the right answer ?
0
0
answer C
0
0
Are you sure IPman? I would say it’s B.
Unlike Quality of Service (QoS) traffic management, Class of Service technologies do not guarantee a level of service in terms of bandwidth and delivery time; they offer a “best-effort.” (http://searchtelecom.techtarget.com/definition/Class-of-Service)
0
0
Answer is C
Another benefit of WFQ is that you can assign each queue a guaranteed minimum bandwidth. Although byte-count WRR does let you calculate the bandwidth allocated to the port based on the weight, the guarantee is more straightforward with WFQ. The way that WFQ handles scheduling for queues also helps to prevent latency and jitter.
0
0