I am ready to send the question to 6man. Before doing this, I got a question for GI-DS-lite. The spec assumes that there is a single pt-to-pt tunnel from the GW to AFTR. If we use Flow Label, the BRAS will have a pt-to-mp tunnel from BRAS to AFTR (each CPE will have a dedicated IP-in-IPv6 tunnel). Will this violate the spec?
On 9/14/10 1:41 PM, "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Yiu, > >> >>> ...FB: Well, the concern is a more general one. I'm not disagreeing >> that we >>> might be able to have flow policies even with the new use of the > flow >> label. >>> The thing that I think requires more discussion is whether people > see >> a need >>> for using the IPv6 flow label in the core of their network, even if >> GI-DS-lite >>> with this new encapsulation would be used within the very same >> deployment. If >>> there is such a use, the new encap might create challenges... - > which >> we >>> should understand upfront. I don't know all the foreseen use-cases >> for the >>> flow label, hence my earlier question on whether the question has >> been taken >>> to a larger audience (especially 6man). >>> >> I don't disagree, but the ip address used by the CPE is only used by >> the CPE >> sourced traffic, this is why I think it is safe to be used. One can >> consider >> all the IPv4 traffic of a household is a flow (for encap). In this >> setup, >> this is rather true and should not affect other flow label for native >> v6 >> traffic. >> >> I also want to hear more inputs. This is why I moved this discussion > to >> the >> mailing list. We will also post this question to 6man. >> > > ... FB: Great, and thanks for widening the audience. BTW/ - one could > construct (theoretical) use cases, where the use of the flow label as > CID would at least change network behavior, e.g. imagine that a provider > would use ECMP and the hash would include the flow label (as initially > anticipated when the flow label was introduced). With the assumption of > SA and DA (Gateway and AFTR) being the same for all flows, the hash of > the flow label would determine ECMP behavior - desirable or not, it > would have an impact. So am curious to see whether there are real use > cases out there. > > Thanks, Frank _______________________________________________ Softwires mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/softwires
