Thomas Narten <nar...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > What is *required* is that the hash function (or whatever function > that is used) on the router maps the tuples in a *uniform* way across > the range of possible outputs. > > If you have 10 links, and all your Flow Labels are clustered around > low ten values, but in an approximately uniform way, a simple modulo > hash will get you the kind of distribution you need. > > The range of values of the flow label itself does not need to be > uniformly distributed.
I'm strongly in favor of stating the requirement this way (though perhaps more wordsmithing can make it even better). AFAICT, this is our actual concern -- that an Equal Cost Multipath router can do a simple hash function to distribute flows across multiple links without endangering in-order delivery of the individual flows identified in the Flow Label. (I'd also like a statement to that effect, or whatever it is we actually mean to accomplish.) > If that is a requirement, I'd like to see the justification, not just > hand waiving. Me too. -- John Leslie <j...@jlc.net> -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
