Jim,
Please reexamine.
As a hint, note that MPLS, which is using *mutable* labels, is using
RSVP-TE (extension of RSVP
for Traffic Engineering) as one of the label distribution mechanisms.
Alex
Jim Bound wrote:
>
> Yes I would as a note. I want what we orginally called for and to make
> sure nothing breaks RSVPv6 which uses the flowlabel too.
>
> /jim
>
> On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Tim Chown wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 17 Aug 2001, Francis Dupont wrote:
> >
> > > In your previous mail you wrote:
> > >
> > > I think the WG needs to decide once and for all whether the flow label is
> > > a) a CATNIP or MPLS-like routing handle
> > > or b) a QOS hint for intserv only
> > > or c) a QOS hint for intserv and diffserv
> > > or d) a waste of bits
> > >
> > > => I vote for b)
> >
> > So would you vote to mandate that the field is non-mutable in transit too?
> >
> > tim
> >
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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]
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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]
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
