On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 8:44 AM, Pablo Camarillo (pcamaril) <pcama...@cisco.com> wrote: > Tom, > > Isn't the IPv6 flow label designed exactly to avoid that?
Yes, that is supposed to handle ECMP. There are might be other optimizations of packets for UDP and TCP that could be lost in IP/IP encapsulation. > Are you suggesting to use UDP to avoid using the flow label? > No, I would much prefer that flow label is used for ECMP and intermediate nodes stop doing DPI. Problem is that there's been resistence from some operators to enabling the flow label for ECMP since it might not be persistent for a flow, this can wreak havoc in deployments that maintain state in the network of need consistent hashing for load balancing. Discussion on this issue occasionally pops up on 6man list. Tom > Cheers, > Pablo. > > On 18/07/2018, 10:37, "Tom Herbert" <t...@quantonium.net> wrote: > > One caveat to that is that some > intermediate nodes may want to do DPI into transport layer to get > ports for ECMP or other reasons, if that is desirable it would be easy > enough to alternatively use a UDP encapsulation-- either continue with > GTP or switch to a more generic one like GUE. > _______________________________________________ dmm mailing list dmm@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dmm
