Tony's comments on the text seem valid to me. Brian
Tony Hain wrote: ... > I do have comments on the text. I would like to see the following > changed from: > 4. Flow Labeling Requirements > (4) The source SHOULD assign each new transport connection (e.g. > TCP, SCTP) to a new flow. > > to: > (4) The source SHOULD assign each unrelated transport connection (e.g. > TCP, SCTP) to a new flow. > > This would keep it from conflicting with (3). > > 5. Flow State Establishment Requirements > ... > To enable co-existence of different methods in IPv6 nodes, the > methods MUST meet the following basic requirements: > ... > (3) The IPv6 node facility keeping track of the Flow Label and the > associated Source and Destination Addresses MUST be utilized > when assigning Flow Label values to new flows (see section 4 > above). > > That wording seems awkward, how about: > (3) The IPv6 source node MUST provide a facility for keeping track > of the Flow Label values associated with particular Source and > Destination Addresses for use when assigning Flow Label to new flows > (see section 4 above). > > Tony -------------------------------------------------------------------- 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
