Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Preamble: this is getting pretty far away from the core of the debate.
Actually I thought the threads were very focused on the topic.
Do we need to redefine the FL field to allow diffserv to have an
immutable field with well-known end-to-end semantics, or not? Since
the diffserv WG didn't want to use the field it was given that way
why should we give it part of another one?
If those are not the core of the debate I am really confused.
> I'd like the chairs to make some consensus calls, because
> we are going round in circles.
Since the conversation is not widespread this may help spark further
input.
> There is no request for a new mutable field. On the contrary, diffserv
> classification needs something that is globally unique.
I agree with you about what diffserv needs, but Alex keeps insisting
that those bits remain mutable. If that happens diffserv will have two
mutable fields and still won't work.
> That's a *complete* mischaracterisation. It doesn't resemble an MPLS
> tag in any shape or form. It's in the IP header becasue it is used to
> drive schedulers for queues of IP packets.
Both are a set of bits that only have context within an administrative
domain, and both are used for identifying the outgoing packet queue in
the router. The only difference is that one gets added and stripped off
at every domain boundary, while the other is simply overwritten.
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
