MENU
Since installing a cisco TelePresence system, the company is experiencing other application having response issues when the system in use. As a result, the company asked an architect to recommend a QoS solution. The customer is currently using a CBWFQ policy to manage traffic on an internet connection with a speed of 100 Mbps. Which link-capacity limit must the architect choose for strict-priority for the real-time traffic?
Suggested Answer: C
Get Premium 300-420 Questions
as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF
Real Exam Format
Detailed Explanations
Instant Access
Get Your Practice Test
https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/td/docs/ios-xml/ios/qos_conmgt/configuration/xe-3s/qos-conmgt-xe-3s-book/qos-conmgt-oview.html#GUID-48F6AF58-5CCC-44A0-B868-125AE453FF2A%20%20%20%20%20%20(75%20Mbps)
The sum of all bandwidth allocation on an interface cannot exceed 75 percent of the total available interface bandwidth. The remaining 25 percent is used for other overhead, including Layer 2 overhead, routing traffic, and best-effort traffic. Bandwidth for the CBWFQ class-default class, for instance, is taken from the remaining 25 percent.
42 comments · newest first
TA
Tammara
11 months ago
I’m surprised they’re even using CBWFQ with that setup.
CH
Chara
11 months ago
Wait, 75 Mbps? That seems way too high for strict-priority!
LE
Lemuel
11 months ago
33 Mbps sounds a bit low for real-time traffic, right?
DE
Desire
11 months ago
Definitely should be 50 Mbps, that makes sense!
DW
Dwight
12 months ago
I think 25 Mbps is a safe bet for strict-priority.
RU
Rueben
12 months ago
I thought the limit for strict-priority should be less than half of the total bandwidth, so maybe 33 Mbps? But I’m not entirely confident about that.
CH
Chan
1 year ago
I vaguely recall that strict-priority should be a significant portion, maybe around 50 Mbps? That seems reasonable for video traffic, but I could be mixing it up with another topic.
TA
Tanesha
1 year ago
I think I practiced a similar question where we had to determine bandwidth limits for different types of traffic. I feel like 25 Mbps might be too low for real-time applications.
EL
Eladia
1 year ago
I remember that for strict-priority traffic, you typically want to allocate a portion of the total bandwidth, but I'm not sure how much exactly.
LA
Lavera
1 year ago
This is a tricky one. I'll need to think through the QoS principles and how they apply to this specific scenario to determine the correct link-capacity limit for the strict-priority queue.
BR
Brock
1 year ago
I'm pretty confident I can solve this. The key is to understand the relationship between the total bandwidth, the CBWFQ policy, and the strict-priority queue requirements for the real-time traffic.
VA
Valentine
1 year ago
Okay, let's see. The company is using a CBWFQ policy on a 100 Mbps internet connection, and they want to prioritize the real-time traffic from the Cisco TelePresence system. I'll need to do some calculations to find the right limit.
AL
Alyssa
1 year ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused about how to determine the appropriate link-capacity limit for the strict-priority queue. I'll need to review the QoS concepts and guidelines.
ER
Erick
1 year ago
This question seems straightforward. I think I can figure this out by considering the total bandwidth and the requirements for the real-time traffic.
HA
Hana
2 years ago
I'm just going to close my eyes and point to an answer. That's how I passed the last one, right? *chuckles* Oh, wait, this is a serious exam. Hmm, I'll go with B) 50 Mbps.
FR
Francine
2 years ago
User 4: I'm going to stick with the original choice and say B) 50 Mbps.
JU
Justine
2 years ago
User 3: I believe it's D) 75 Mbps.
LA
Laurel
2 years ago
User 2: I'm not sure about that. I would go with C) 33 Mbps.
MA
Marci
2 years ago
User 1: I think the answer is A) 25 Mbps.
GO
Goldie
2 years ago
Hmm, that makes sense. I see your point now.
RO
Rosina
2 years ago
Wait, are we sure the question isn't a trick? What if the answer is actually E) All of the above? Just kidding, but you never know with these certification exams.
PE
Penney
2 years ago
I disagree, I believe the answer is D) 75 Mbps because it should be higher to prioritize real-time traffic.
TY
Tyra
2 years ago
This is a tough one. I'm going to have to go with B) 50 Mbps. Anything higher might be overkill, and anything lower could cause issues for the real-time traffic.
KA
Katheryn
2 years ago
D) 75 Mbps? That's a bit too much, isn't it? I'd go with A) 25 Mbps to be on the safe side.
KA
Katlyn
2 years ago
D) Yeah, 75 Mbps does seem high. A) 25 Mbps is a safer option.
AL
Alesia
2 years ago
C) 33 Mbps might be pushing it, better to stick with the lower limit.
JO
Jodi
2 years ago
Yeah, it's always better to err on the side of caution when it comes to QoS solutions.
DE
Desire
2 years ago
I agree, it's better to be conservative with the link-capacity limit.
BE
Bettye
2 years ago
B) I agree, it's better to be safe and prioritize the real-time traffic.
HE
Hester
2 years ago
I think A) 25 Mbps is a safer choice for strict-priority traffic.
KR
Kristofer
2 years ago
A) 25 Mbps sounds like a good choice for strict-priority traffic.
GO
Goldie
2 years ago
I think the answer is A) 25 Mbps because it should be less than the total link capacity.
OL
Oliva
2 years ago
Hmm, I'm not sure. C) 33 Mbps seems like a reasonable compromise between giving the real-time traffic priority and leaving enough bandwidth for other applications.
DO
Dona
2 years ago
D) 75 Mbps might be too high for the real-time traffic.
BA
Barrett
2 years ago
C) 33 Mbps could be a good balance for the real-time traffic and other applications.
LU
Lura
2 years ago
B) 50 Mbps might be too much bandwidth for the real-time traffic.
SE
Serita
2 years ago
A) 25 Mbps would be too low for the real-time traffic.
DA
Danilo
2 years ago
I think the answer is B) 50 Mbps. The strict-priority queue should be limited to about half the total bandwidth to ensure that other traffic is not starved.
LI
Linn
2 years ago
Yes, that's correct. It ensures that other traffic is not starved.
LE
Letha
2 years ago
So, the correct answer is B) 50 Mbps then.
MA
Marion
2 years ago
I agree, the strict-priority queue should be limited to about half the total bandwidth.
LA
Lang
2 years ago
I think the answer is B) 50 Mbps.