Brian Haberman wrote:
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >> I don't disagree with you - however my point was I thought that the
> > >> application should be involved in what value of the flow label is used.
> > >
> > >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 can see the flow label management issue being more efficient in
> > >the IPv6 stack itself.
> >
> >         FYI, draft-itojun-ipv6-flowlabel-api-01.txt provides no way to
> >         set flowlabel value from the userland.  the (sending) kernel decides
> >         the value.  receiver apps can inspect the value.
> 
> Exactly.  I prefer that rather than one that requires the apps to make
> a decision on the value.

We certainly shouldn't *require* apps to make a decision, but (see my
previous message) we must make it possible for them. Therefore,
the API must provide an option for the sender to set the value. In any case,
draft-itojun-ipv6-flowlabel-api-01.txt will have to be reviewed after we
reach consensus on draft-ietf-ipv6-flow-label

   Brian
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to