Brian,
Please re-examine. My point was that both Diffserv, and MPLS, deal with
QoS topics, as the IPv6 flow label does. Therefore, orthogonality, if I
understand you correctly, as independence from each other, and the rest,
has little relevance to my point.
In contradiction to earlier calls, and statements on this list, your
message seem to suggest that the flow label is well defined, and its
role well determined... If that is the case, I should say I am sorry:
this is rather a waste of everybody's time....
Alex
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
>
> Alex,
>
> Alex Conta wrote:
> >
> > Since the IPv6 flow label work started, two major efforts in IETF made
> > significant progress on related topics: Diffserv and MPLS.
>
> Steve's already said this but I want to say it again: no!
>
> The Flow Label is totally orthogonal to diffserv, which has no need
> of it, since it has its own mutable 6-bit field (more than enough).
>
> The Flow Label is totally orthogonal to the MPLS Shim, which is at a lower
> layer and is edge-to-edge, not end-to-end.
>
> As has been observed, the Flow Label is accommodated neatly by the IntServ
> model.
>
> Brian
S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
