On 2011-06-28 11:40, Jari Arkko wrote: > I still have an uneasy feeling about the changing flow IDs across the > same TCP session. It feels wrong. > > That being said, Ran's argument that different classifications for > fragmented/non-fragmented packets already happening for load-balancing > reasons (and presumably even for IPv4) when a fragmented packet hits a > backbone router and the port numbers are not in the packet. > > I'm fine with Brian's suggested text. I would personally open the text > up a bit more, however. I would explain, for instance, why RFC 4311 is > relevant. I would explain the tradeoffs between packet reassembly, > different flow IDs, and using just 2-tuples.
OK, I have to provide more words, clearly... it may take another day or two. Brian -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
