Le 21 avr. 2010 à 23:17, Brian E Carpenter a écrit :

> On 2010-04-21 20:50, Rémi Després wrote:
>> Hi Brian,
>> 
>> I wonder what you think of what I answered to James on another discussion 
>> thread.
> 
> I agree. I think that particular SHOULD in the RFC is an error. It "SHOULD"
> have said something like:
> 
> "The source node MUST select new Flow Label values by a method that
> prevents unintended Flow Label value reuse."

Yes, that's more appropriate.

Suggesting in addition that a 5-tuple hash can be an easy way to set flow-label 
values, because it is stateless, would IMHO improve chances that host really 
set them.
Wold you agree on this too?

RD


> 
>   Brian
> 
>> Regards,
>> RD
>> 
>> 
>> Début du message réexpédié :
>> 
>>> De : Rémi Després <[email protected]>
>>> Date : 21 avril 2010 10:43:55 HAEC
>>> À : james woodyatt <[email protected]>
>>> Cc : 6man 6man <[email protected]>
>>> Objet : Rép : Draft-krishnan-ipv6-exthdr-08 to become asap a 6man WG draft ?
>>> 
>>> ...
>>>> In general, only some IPv6 packets have 5-tuples, and of those, only a 
>>>> subset can have 5-tuples that packet analyzers can extract, i.e. the rest 
>>>> are encapsulated in ESP or a moral equivalent (and ESP packets have 
>>>> 4-tuples).
>>>> 
>>>> Hosts should set flow labels.  
>>> Agreed.
>>> 
>>> This should be IMHO the conclusion of the current discussion on flow 
>>> labels, BUT provided hosts are explicitly permitted to set flow-label 
>>> values statelessly for each datagram, with a hash of their 5-tuples.
>>> (RFC 3697 says "To avoid accidental Flow Label value reuse, the source node 
>>> SHOULD select new Flow Label values in a well-defined sequence", which 
>>> privileges flow-label assignments that are stateful per connection, a 
>>> choice significantly more complex than needed.)
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to