QoS Queue

[mhoppes]

Which is a higher priority? Higher or lower numbers?

[Eric Stern]

Higher, 7 is the highest priority.

[joeyr-stc]

I know this is an old post but I was told that zero is the highest priority.

viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4100&p=25641#p25641

[Stephen]

Hey joeyr-stc,

After going over this again with the team internally. It appears that information was incorrect. We had a mis-communication when discussing it because our power tab's priorities work in the opposite fashion. But the manufacturer of our switchcore has hardwired the queue's 0 - 7, 7 being the highest priority.

Thank you for pointing this out so I could double check again.

[northmendo]

Is there any way for me to test this? In this post - viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4100
It says different. If it is indeed 7-0 rather than 0-7 can you please make a correction on the older post. I'm not sure what to think.

[mike99]

It depend of the scheduler.
If using strict priority, 7 is higher and 0 lower.
If using WRR, every queues have same priority.

Note that QoS on Netonix is local only and won't affect other devices on your network. By exemple, if you connect a wireless radio that do 60~180 Mb/s to a netonix, it's useless to add QoS on the a gigabit port that will never be saturated since the bottle neck is the wireless radio connected to it.

I'm still hoping Netonix to add the possibility to rewrite PCP and DSCP value instead. That would be way more usefull for WISP. Eric already specified that the core switch could do it in this post.
https://forum.netonix.com/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3328&p=23562&hilit=pcp#p23562

[Stephen]

Is there any way for me to test this? In this post - viewtopic.php?f=6&t=4100
It says different. If it is indeed 7-0 rather than 0-7 can you please make a correction on the older post. I'm not sure what to think.

If you read to the end of that post it has already been corrected.