After studying the technology im a bit confused about the correlation between the conversation numbers and the weights:
If you look the table for example:
Flow/Conversation Numbers | Weight | Description |
Below 2^N | Weight(i)=32384/(IP_Precedence(i)+1) | Dynamic flows, unclassified traffic. This is the classic “fair-queue”. |
2^N…2^N+7 | Weight(i)=1024 | Link Queues. Routing updates, Layer 2 Keepalives etc. Basically it’s the traffic marked as PAK_PRIORITY inside the router. |
2^N+8 | Weight(i)=0 | LLQ
or the priority queue. CBWFQ always service this queue first, but
de-queued packets are policed using the defined token bucket parameters. |
Above 2^N+8 | Weight(i) = Const*Interface_BW/Class_BW | User-defined
classes. Those classes are treated by CBWFQ as the RSVP flows, with
relatively low weights. Their weights are almost all the time better
than the weights of dynamic flows. |
The flow numbers and flow number ranges in the table are mapped statically to the respective weights above? for example if N = 8 we will have the LLQ mapped always on flow number 264 with a weight of 0 ? So for example that mean that on flow numbers above the 2^N+8 we can have only user-defined classes?