Muhammad Jaseemuddin wrote: > I completely agree with you that unless we have a > signalling/flow-establishment mechanism we cannot really define the > flow-label usage in a meaninful way. Perhaps we should wait until new > NSIS sginalling might come-up with some usage and mechanism for this > bit-space.
But it is the responsibility of this group to restrict their domain of choices to things that make architectural sense. As I said in the last note to Margaret, the participants in the QoS WGs have consistently proven they don't understand the value of an end-to-end constant. If we don't point out that the DSCP is their mutable field to play with so leave the FL alone, we will end up with 2 random numbers and application developers will continue to ignore QoS because they have no means to express their intent that will be valid at all points in the path. 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
