At 12:09 PM +0100 3/14/01, Erik Nordmark wrote:
>Thus before the WG can actually make any decisions about flow label
>semantics I think we need to have folks write up the different
>problem statements for which they see the flow label as a potential solution.
>Then the WG can decide which problem(s) are the most important to solve
>and whether or not using the flow label is the best solution. That would
>then hopefully lead to nailing down the semantics of the flow label.
>
>So having the discussion you propose is fine, but please keep the problem
>statements in mind.
Excellent point, Erik. Clearly, we don't have time for much writing up
before the meeting, but those of you who wish to make presentations
should include a description of what problems you are trying to solve,
why those are essential problems to solve, and why using the IPv6 Flow
Label is the best or only way to solve them. It would be good if our
discussion helps to focus the problem space and the set of potential
solutions, so there will be fewer drafts that need to be written and
argued about afterwards. (Well, one can hope... :-)
Steve
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page: http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive: ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
