Gathering all the pieces of the puzzle and planning the implementation is the most important part of QoS and CAC implementation. The implementation of QoS and CAC itself is not very difficult, but without proper planning, it could lead to an even poorer QoE for the end user. A poorly planned and implemented QoS scheme could, in other words, have a negative impact on the performance of the applications.
Never rush through this part; wait a week or two with the implementation rather than do it the wrong way.
Try to figure out the best way to document the network environment where the Lync traffic will be introduced. Decide whether to create Visio drawings, create a separate database, keep the records in an Excel spreadsheet or Notepad, or do all of the above or whatever works best. In this recipe, we'll give a few examples of simple tables to reflect the data we talk about, but there are other ways to do this as well. As part of this task, you should be acquainted with more information from the following online resources:
There are a lot of important questions to be answered before the planning can begin. Some of the important ones are as follows:
Use all of the preceding information and the bandwidth calculator to decide on the answers to the following five important questions:
Based on all the information gathered, we could end up with a Visio that draws tables like the one shown as follows:
The naming of table headers is based on the actual PowerShell command parameters used to import data, if applicable.
The values for the Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) marking and port ranges are only examples, and are not to be implemented blindly. Do the calculations and avoid collisions based on the information provided in the white papers:
Identity |
AudioBWLimit |
AudioBWSessionLimit |
VideoBWLimit |
VideoBWSessionLimit |
Description |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Low |
40 |
800 (20 Calls) |
100 |
100 (Effectively 0 call) |
For bad WAN links |
Medium |
60 |
2400 (40 Calls) |
640 |
6400 (10 Calls) |
Standard WAN links |
High |
80 |
8000 (100 Calls) |
1500 |
75000 (50 Calls) |
Best Quality |
Identity |
CentralSite |
AudioAlternatePath |
VideoAlternatePath |
Description |
---|---|---|---|---|
East |
ROS |
0 |
0 |
Test1 |
West |
ROS |
1 |
1 |
Test2 |
North |
DAR |
1 |
1 |
Test3 |
South |
DAR |
1 |
1 |
Test4 |
Identity |
NetworkRegionID |
BWPolicyProfileID |
Description |
---|---|---|---|
Site X |
East |
Medium |
Remote X |
Site Y |
West |
High |
Remote Y |
Site Z |
North |
Medium |
Remote Z |
Site 42 |
South |
Low |
VPN 42 |
Identity |
MaskBits |
Description |
NetworkSiteID |
---|---|---|---|
10.10.30.0 |
24 |
SkyMode |
Site Z |
10.10.31.0 |
24 |
EarthMode |
Site 42 |
10.10.40.0 |
24 |
FireMode |
Site X |
10.10.41.0 |
24 |
WaterMode |
Site Y |
Identity |
NetworkRegionID1 |
NetworkRegionID2 |
BWPolicyProfileID |
---|---|---|---|
Route1 |
North |
East |
Medium |
Route2 |
South |
West |
Medium |
Route3 |
East |
West |
High |
Identity |
NetworkRegionID1 |
NetworkRegionID2 |
NetworkRegionLinkIDs |
---|---|---|---|
North_To_East |
North |
East |
Route1 |
North_To_West |
North |
West |
Route1;Route3 |
North_to_South |
North |
South |
Route3;Route1;Route2 |
East_to_west |
East |
West |
Route3 |
East_to_south |
East |
South |
Route2;Route3 |
West_to_south |
West |
South |
Route2 |
Type of traffic |
DSCP Value |
---|---|
Audio |
46 (EF) |
Video |
34 (AF41) |
Signaling and app sharing |
24 (CS3) |
File transfer |
18 |
Type of service |
Port start |
Port count (Number of ports) |
Range = |
---|---|---|---|
Audio |
50000 |
2000 |
50000 - 51999 |
Video |
52000 |
2000 |
52000 - 53999 |
App sharing |
54000 |
2000 |
54000 - 55999 |
File transfer |
56000 |
2000 |
56000 - 57999 |
Edge service |
10000 |