A small update on this: 1. David Malone found a bug in my C code, which changes the conclusion. Of the algorithms I tried, the one designated #2 apparently performs best of the three, once the bug is fixed. I can't complete the tests and post an updated report until mid-July, due to travel.
2. From the feedback I've received, it's clear that there is great scope for experimenting with various algorithms to find the best one. Assuming we leave an example algorithm in the draft, the text needs to make this clear. We can wait for the Area Director's review before deciding what to do about this. Regards Brian On 2011-06-01 17:13, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > In summary: the algorithm suggested in the Appendix to > draft-ietf-6man-flow-3697bis-04 doesn't perform very well > on real packets, and I have an improved version to suggest. > > This doesn't affect the normative text in the draft, so I > believe it can be fixed. > > The full story, with fonts, tables and pictures: > > http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~brian/flowhash.html > -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------