An administrator configures a scheduler map on a Junos MX Series router with three queues: best-effort with transmit-rate remainder, expedited-forwarding with a strict-high transmit rate, and assured-forwarding with a transmit rate of 30 percent. Users report that voice quality degrades whenever assured-forwarding traffic bursts, even though expedited-forwarding is marked strict-high. Which statement explains this behavior?
A strict-high queue is serviced first, but its effective rate can still be constrained by an interface-level shaper or by other strict-high queues competing for the same bandwidth. If the interface shaper or another strict-high queue consumes the available bandwidth, voice packets can be delayed even though the queue is marked strict-high.
Why this answer
A strict-high queue is always serviced before other queues, but its throughput is still bounded by any interface-level shaper and by the aggregate demand of other strict-high queues. When the interface is oversubscribed or shaped, voice can be delayed despite the strict-high designation, which matches the reported symptom.
Exam trap
The trap here is believing that strict-high priority bypasses all bandwidth limits, when interface shapers and competing strict-high queues can still constrain it.