Michael Thomas wrote:
>
> Margaret Wasserman writes:
> >
> > If the WG really wants to define the flow label so that it can be used
> > for signalling-based mechanisms like RSVP, NSIS and diffserv, with the
> > clear understanding that this makes the value _USELESS_ for the types
> > of applications I've described above, that is fine with me.
>
> I'm still completely lost. How does it make it
> useless?
I must be lost as well. In my reading of the flow label spec, I see
the capability to do load balancing quite easily. The host sending
the data assigns unique flow labels however it wants (just like Erik
had mentioned). The routers can then either forward based solely on
the DA or it can hash the <DA,SA,FlowLabel> for load balancing. If
you want to talk DiffServ, IntServ, or something of that flavor, the
flow label would be signaled, the router would recognize it during
packet classification and deal with it how it sees fit.
So, my opinion is that the spec does what it set out to accomplish.
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
