Brian sez: > In the intserv case, it is no different. In the diffserv case, the presumption > is that we would use IANA-assigned, globally meaningful values, that are > specific to a desired QOS treatment rather than to any individual traffic flow. > The implementation details (including the DSCP value and router configurations) > may differ from ISP to ISP, but the flow label bits convey end to end > semantics. This is more powerful than port numbers whose semantics are poor at > best for QOS purposes, and it works when the port numbers are invisible.
this still begs the question why do folk think that ISPs half way around the world would find it useful to know what the sending computer wanted for QoS? at least in the case of difserv if an ISP gets a DSCP there is some implied authorization by the previous network (ISP or enterprise) - how does authorization happen in the case of imutable globally meaningful values? I see no reason to believe that such a field will be any use whatsoever in providing QoS in the Internet - and it is redundant in an enterprise because the enterprise can decide to not change the DSCP field unless there is some hint of a way for this change to serve any useful purpose we should just leave things as they are 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
