Joel,
On 21/12/2012 02:37, joel jaeggli wrote:
> On 12/20/12 5:38 PM, Liubing (Leo) wrote:
>> I'm in favor of it. It's a good use case of flow label for L3/4 load
>> balancing
> RFC 6437 did not go nearly far enough in my opinion make the flow label
> suitable for this application.
>
> The fact of the matter is if I attempted to use the flow label today as
> part of a load balancing scheme it would provide zero additional
> entropy, and what's more I still have to look at the upper layer header.
Have you read the latest version? That is discussed. The point is to
provide a path to fixing that problem.
> Furthermore the document proposes the use of flow label across muliple
> flows as a common "session key" across multiple flows
No, you definitely haven't read the latest version. It absolutely
does not propose that. If you want to discuss that point, please
comment on draft-tarreau-extend-flow-label-balancing, which is
*not* proposed for adoption at this time.
Brian
which I personally
> feel is inconsistent with the notion of a flow, is certainly embedding
> upper layer (notionally above the l4 header) session information in the
> layer-3 header and suffers from the exposures described in section 6 of
> 6437 and making no attempt to ameliorate them.
>
>> Thanks
>>
>> B.R.
>> Bing
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
>>> Behalf Of Suresh Krishnan
>>> Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 8:46 PM
>>> To: Internet Area
>>> Cc: Julien Laganier; Ralph Droms
>>> Subject: [Int-area] Call for adoption of
>>> draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> This draft has been presented at intarea face to face meetings and
>>> has
>>> received a bit of discussion. It has been difficult to gauge whether the
>>> wg is interested in this work or not. This call is being initiated to
>>> determine whether there is WG consensus towards adoption of
>>> draft-carpenter-flow-label-balancing-02 as an intarea WG draft. Please
>>> state whether or not you're in favor of the adoption by replying to this
>>> email. If you are not in favor, please also state your objections in
>>> your response. This adoption call will complete on 2013-01-04.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Suresh & Julien
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Int-area mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>> _______________________________________________
>> Int-area mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Int-area mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
>
_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area
