I agree. This can be cleaned up in the text.

   Brian

On 2011-02-04 14:24, Thomas Narten wrote:
> Jarno Rajahalme <[email protected]> writes:
> 
>> These are two different things: flow labeling (which labels to
>> assign) and flow state establishment (how to treat specific
>> flows). My own reading has been that flow labeling mechanisms may be
>> stateful or stateless (for example, pseudo-random sequences were
>> mentioned explicitly), and that signaling mechanisms may be needed
>> to provide flow-specific treatment.
> 
> This is an important observation.
> 
> I think we can allow for stateless use of the Flow Label while
> preserving the original definition  for other types of usages.
> 
> The original restrictions about not reusing Flow Label values had to
> do with stateful setup protocols. There was an assumption of sorts
> that there was agreement between the source of the traffic and the
> routers on what a particular Flow Label value meant and how the router
> was to assign resources. If an originating node reboots, and reuses a
> Flow Label value too soon, the routers may not have timed out their
> state and undesirable things might happen.
> 
> We should preserve those semantics, not that I'm optimistic we will
> ever need to, but because we can easily enough.
> 
> For stateless usages of the flow label, it really doesn't matter if a
> particular Flow Label value is reused too soon.
> 
> It's in the stateful case that it matters. So just require that when
> the Flow Label is set to a value as part of a stateful flow usage, in
> *that* case, make sure we don't reuse Flow Label values too soon. That
> is, for the more complex case (stateful involving setup) it's still
> fine to required adherance to the original semantics. For the
> stateless use, we can relax the requirements.
> 
> The only place where this gets potentially messy is if you have an
> originating node setting the Flow Label using stateful means, but is
> also originating packets with zero Flow Label values, and then some
> intermediate device changes those values from 0 to something else --
> potentially colliding with the stateful value. But this is a bit of an
> edge case. We could require any node that uses stateful Flow Setup to
> set all Flow Labels properly, or at a minimum not to send out Flow
> Label values that are zero.
> 
> Thomas
> 
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email protected]
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to