Leonid Rozenboim <[email protected]> writes: > I hereby propose to rename the 8-bit "Reserved" field in the 2nd word > to "FlowLabel", similarly to NVGRE header format (RFC 7637). > [...] > Some may argue that an 8-bit flow label is not wide enough, to which I > would respond that it is wide enough for a machine with up to 256 > processors/threads.
The typical flowlabel these days is carried in the source UDP port, with the high-order two bits being 11 and the low-order 14 bits carrying flow information. This proposal for Geneve doesn't carry as much entropy, but the bits are available. > An alternative could be to require a normative header option carrying > a 32-bit flow label. It might also be worth defining such a label for carrying generalized flow identification information. I suppose that in some environments, it might be useful to carry even 64 bits of flow identification. Dale _______________________________________________ nvo3 mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nvo3
