Hi George,
Yes, we are "humming" in agreement to the proposal that we replace section 6 of RFC 2460 with the following text: > The 20-bit Flow Label field in the IPv6 header MAY be set by a > source to 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. > > This specification does not further define the meaning of the > Flow Label. > And that we delete Appendix A from RFC 2460. Actually, we probably won't update RFC 2460. We'll probably just publish a separate RFC that updates 2460. Margaret At 02:01 PM 1/3/02 , [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >Just a quick question from an interested lurker: Are these hums of >acquiescence in response, specifically, to the idea that an originating >node may set the flow label to any value, and that nodes forwarding >packets will leave that value alone? -- George Mitchell > >-------------------------------------------------------------------- >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] >-------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
