Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Please don't use this kind of language. As I just said on the other
> thread, diffserv reached consensus (in 1998) on a completely self-
> consistent model meeting the key requirements stated by ISPs.
I did not mean to be inflammatory, I was just reacting to the statement
by Alex about what we can afford to do at this point in time.
While the diffserv WG has a self-consistent model, it is incomplete
and in fact unworkable in the presence of IPsec and multiple domains.
> What on earth do you mean? The DSCP to PHB mapping is configured,
> but there is nothing random involved.
>From an end-to-end perspective it is completely random. Yes there
is structure within each domain, but there is no way to predict how
each provider will set those bits, so one provider can't use the
settings from another as a basis for decisions.
> Again, it isn't a question of "refuses". See above.
I understand there was a contingent of the WG that insisted on the
current behavior, but in doing so they created a situation where the
WG refused to make static mappings for those bits a MUST.
Tony
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
