In your previous mail you wrote:
> => I still don't understand what is the difference between
> x and hash(P1 || P2 || x) where x can be something specific
> to this flow.
=> Well it doesn't have to be flow specific.
=> you wrote "x can be something specific"...
If you're trying to avoid exposing the encryption key, you
can use x, where x is any number that both nodes are
aware of.
=> I don't understand why the peer has to be aware of x.
Do you want to provide QoS inside end nodes? IMHO this is
not a bad idea because the CPU is far faster than I/O subsystems,
i.e. this is the wrong place.
BTW most implementations don't provide an API to get the received
flow ID or label, just because this is not considered as useful.
Regards
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
