> > => I didn't say COPS is not used. I'd love to know about the 
 > > deployment that you're referring to (where hosts are 
 > setting the TC 
 > > routinely)...
 > 
 > Well TC marking is used in my lab, works according to specs.
 > 
 > All MIPv6 implementations supposedly use it too, because the 
 > MIP6 spec
 > says so.

=> What are you talking about? RFC 3775 doesn't say a host should set the TC
field. 

<snip>

 > > => No. I don't think you understand that routers can 
 > select any next 
 > > hop they think is appropriate. Link down/up events are only one 
 > > factor in this selection. This is a perfectly acceptable behaviour.
 > 
 > Ok, let me try cool down.  I agree routers select a next hop 
 > they think
 > appropriate w/o endnode involvement.  That selection happens based on
 > the src and dst address and the traffic class, all being set 
 > by the endnode.
 > 
 > You seem to say other routers do it differently, not looking at any
 > field, or changing some of the fields.  

=> I never said that. That would be nonesense.

   You don't say what exactly
 > method is used.  

=> I said they do it on a per-flow basis, meaning a flow is expected to take
the same path in the network. But two different flows can take different
paths. 

 > I also think that the flow binding monami6 methods could make a lot
 > sense _if_ the MR were informed by the LFN of LFN's 
 > preferences.  

=> That's fine, but as I mentioned earlier (and so did Thierry) this is a
separate point and can augment any proposal.

   This
 > is the crux of our argument and we differ - you say flow bindings
 > monami6 don't need that LFN preferences.  

=> You must be reading different text from what I wrote, I never said that.
I said it's a separate issue and I hope it gets solved. It's orthogonal to
the choice of protocol, which is what Jari's thread was about.

   And knowing that in NEMO WG
 > they look _probably_ at exactly MR communicating with LFN 
 > for parameter
 > exchange for RO then I think they should be done in tandem.  Ie flow
 > bindings in monami6 aren't possible w/o RO in NEMO.

=> Sorry, I don't know what you're talking about.

Hesham

 > 
 > Alex
 > 



_______________________________________________
Int-area mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/int-area

Reply via email to