[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >> 1) What work has been done with regards to specifying an API for > >> setting the Traffic Class fields? Anything other than the IPv6 > >> APIs? > >There was draft-itojun-ipv6-flowlabel-api-01.txt (April 2001). > >itojun may want to comment. > > the API for traffic class field is merged into 2292bis. see 2292bis > for exact wording i've put in. basically ECN bits specified by user > can be overridden by the kernel, if the kernel implements ECN > mechanism (like for TCP). > > i stopped updating draft-itojun-ipv6-flowlabel-api-01.txt as there were > a lot of discussions on flowlabel semantics, like > draft-ietf-ipv6-flow-label-03.txt. > my plan was to re-start on the API side once the flowlabel semantics > discussion gets completed. btw, i don't think flowlabel relates to > diffserv, am i right?
That is slightly contentious. The flow-label draft does not define use cases, but if that draft is approved in its present form I know how to define a diffserv use case for the flow label (and there are several other use cases). However, it shouldn't affect the socket API discussion. 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] --------------------------------------------------------------------
