> Nobody said they are. The issue is getting something minimal and > unambiguous into the IPv6 spec before it's too late.
if you want "something minimal" why should it imply anyting about QoS? Tony's words talk about "packets requiring special handling" - I see no reason to think that any router will ever want to look at a FL for any QoS related reason - there may be other reasons that routers might want to look at FLs or there might be e2e reasons but I think it is far too early to guess at uses if you want "something minimal" this would do: The 20-bit Flow Label field in the IPv6 header MAY be set by a source to uniquely label sets of packets. Nodes that do not support the Flow Label field MUST set the field to zero when originating a packet, and MUST ignore the field when receiving a packet. All routers MUST pass the field on unchanged when forwarding a packet. Scott -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
