>I don't agree with the "SHOULD NOT" above...
>
>There are some potential uses for flow identification that do not rely on
>any sort of flow establishment mechanism or signalling, such as the use of
>flow labels for load balancing.
>
>To have a useful flow label for these mechanisms, an IPv6 node simply labels
>all of the packets in a given TCP/SCTP connection or UDP communication with
>the same flow label,making some basic effort not to re-use flows too often --
>such as starting with a random number and monotonically increasing it for
>each new connection or communication.
>
>It would be fairly trivial to assign a flow label in this fashion -- not
>much harder than setting it to zero. So, you get a reasonable return for
>very little work.
I agree with Margaret. KAME has been doing this (automatically
assign flow labels to TCP/connected UDP traffic) for a long time,
so that we can help traffic analysis/diffserv researchers.
(they can't correlate traffic due to the use of ESP, or SSH)
draft-itojun-ipv6-flowlabel-api-01.txt has more details on it.
itojun
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------
