Hi Brian, > Is it really the case that the application needs to be involved in > choosing the flow label value? Or is it more reasonable to say that > the app needs to be able to indicate that it wants to use *a* flow > label?
I could see cases where it might want to use a 'new' flow label, an existing flow label, sharing a flow label with another application, etc. > I can see the flow label management issue being more efficient in > the IPv6 stack itself. Well, in anycase, applications (upper layer protocols) may need to manage flow labels as well. One example would be if a user has an existing flow but wants to modify the properties of the flow in some way (higher level of QoS or something). > Of course, there is also an issue of whether two applications on > the same machine communicating with the same peer machine would want > to share a flow label. Exactly. I would suggest that we may not yet know how protocols above IPv6 may want to use the flow label, so over specification of the flow label by this community may not be the way to go. Perhaps it might be somewhat more useful to query TSVWG (for example) to see if they have opinions on this. John -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
