On Tue, 28 Aug 2001, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Christian,
>
> In fact the diffserv requirement is for a 16 bit field, so we could
> adopt:
>
> 0 1
> 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
> |1 0 0 0| Diffserv IPv6 Flow Label |
> +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>
> or something similar, to conserve bits.
I support this, but for different reasons. IPv6 base header has _way_ too
few "reserved" bits (none), and this would get us 3. It's arrogant to
believe we might not find use for them in the future.
(you could always define extension headers to do the thing, but it might
be good to reserve some space for enhancements-to-be in the primary header
too).
--
Pekka Savola "Tell me of difficulties surmounted,
Netcore Oy not those you stumble over and fall"
Systems. Networks. Security. -- Robert Jordan: A Crown of Swords
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
