>
>=> I agree but in the real word IntServ stuff (then flow label marking)
>is done by an edge router. If doesn't matter if the LAN is fast enough
>(and it can be without too much money) and if clients and edge routers
>collaborate.
I don't agree.
>=> What do you not agree about? I agree about the should but not the will.
>Technical there is no reason to set the flow label in the edge router but
>it is very common for not technical reason to see the edge router doing
>the *Serv stuff on the behalf of the real source.
There is no flowlabel to set today so don't tell me the real world is
using it. What they are using is the diffserv bits and other mechanisms
for switching etc...
This is a wide open option and discussion. As I said in prior mail
we may need to take a bit to define if the flow is rewritable.
The cell phone or audio server will set the flowlabel.
>=> it is not what happens today then we should not fordid that the edge
>router rewrites the flow label.
This is discussable and you must not have read my mail to Thomas Eklund.
Which is a good piece of work and I agree with Itojun's presentation of
the flowlabel. Its set by the end node.
>=> don't confuse the real and the ideal worlds.
Excuse me. But lets go offline with this I will match the customers in
the real world building real products who want the flowlabel e2e and we
are talking 3GPP, Military Operations, and Video/Audio apps.
The bottom line is many folks want to use this flowlabel and one of
those folks are those who want it from one client to another client
across the Internet and to NOT BE TOUCHED by a router.
You should not confuse what exists today in IPv4 what can exist in IPv6
tomorrow.
regards,
/jim
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
