Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 10:18:27 -0800 (PST)
From: Michael Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Um, no. I don't want my telephant's local policy --
Then leave them - they'll never learn as long as people just accept it.
| Yes, yes, big deal. They wanted to support
| first hop rewrite, it got a negative reaction
| and from what I can tell they're not wedded to
| that piece. Do you actually disagree, or are
| you just being argumentative?
I am trying to find out what the actual harm would be in reserving exactly
one value for the flow-id field with a meaning defined as "I don't care if
this is altered by the network for its purposes". No-one would have to
use that value if they cared about immutability - just use some different
one. So far, I see no evidence of harm at all - nothing more than
queasiness at the thought of the network altering anything in a packet,
even when the source host has said it is OK for it to be altered (I'm not
sure how you cope with the hop limit field, or source routing).
Unless someone can show that some actual harm can be caused by by this,
then I'm finding it hard to understand why anyone would want to prohibit it.
It all seems to be a case of "I would never want to use this, therefore
you are not allowed to use it either".
kre
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
