A frame relay PVC at router HQ has a CIR of 768 kb/s and the frame relay PVC at router branch office has a CIR of 384 kb/s.
Which QoS mechanism can best be used to ease the data congestion and data loss due to the CIR speed mismatch?
Click on the arrows to vote for the correct answer
A. B. C. D. E. F.C.
In this scenario, the HQ router has a higher CIR than the branch office router. This creates a potential bottleneck for traffic flow, causing congestion and data loss. To alleviate this problem, we need a QoS mechanism that can regulate traffic flow and ensure that the branch office does not receive more traffic than it can handle.
Traffic policing and traffic shaping are two commonly used QoS mechanisms to control network traffic. Traffic policing allows the router to drop excess traffic that exceeds the configured CIR value. This mechanism can be applied at the HQ or branch office, but it is not the best solution because it does not prevent congestion and does not prioritize critical traffic.
Traffic shaping, on the other hand, can smooth out the flow of traffic by buffering and delaying excess traffic to prevent congestion and packet loss. This mechanism can be used at either the HQ or branch office, but the best solution is to apply traffic shaping at the HQ, where the higher CIR is located. This way, the HQ router can buffer and delay excess traffic, allowing the branch office to receive traffic at its own pace and preventing congestion and data loss.
LLQ (Low Latency Queuing) is a QoS mechanism that prioritizes critical traffic, such as voice or video, over non-critical traffic. LLQ can be applied at either the HQ or branch office, but it does not address the issue of CIR speed mismatch and potential congestion.
In conclusion, the best QoS mechanism to ease data congestion and data loss due to the CIR speed mismatch in this scenario is traffic shaping at the HQ.