Re: [spring] [v6ops] FW: New Version Notification for draft-fioccola-spring-flow-label-alt-mark-01.txt

/Antwerp) <gunter.van_de_ve...@nokia.com> Cc: v6...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org Subject: Re: [v6ops] FW: New Version Notification for draft-fioccola-spring-flow-label-alt-mark-01.txt On 7 November 2017 at 02:59, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <gunter.van_de_ve...@noki

Re: [spring] [v6ops] FW: New Version Notification for draft-fioccola-spring-flow-label-alt-mark-01.txt

On 11/07/2017 05:03 AM, Mark Smith wrote: > Hi Gunter, > > On 7 November 2017 at 17:56, Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) > wrote: >> Hi Mark, >> >> The flow label of the original packet is untouched. It is never manipulated >> in this proposal. The flow

Re: [spring] [v6ops] FW: New Version Notification for draft-fioccola-spring-flow-label-alt-mark-01.txt

:markzzzsm...@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 7, 2017 09:04 To: Van De Velde, Gunter (Nokia - BE/Antwerp) <gunter.van_de_ve...@nokia.com> Cc: v6...@ietf.org; spring@ietf.org Subject: Re: [v6ops] FW: New Version Notification for draft-fioccola-spring-flow-label-alt-mark-01.txt Hi Gunter, On

Re: [spring] [v6ops] FW: New Version Notification for draft-fioccola-spring-flow-label-alt-mark-01.txt

Hi, > but this field is, according to [RFC6294], not used in practice. I don't think it's very useful to cite in 2017 a document published in 2011 based on realities in 2010 or earlier. Actually I think you can actually delete the whole phrase; since the proposal tries to respect RFC6437, it is