Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpen...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2011-11-03 15:50, john.lough...@nokia.com wrote: >> >> ... I would suggest the following text: >> >> All nodes SHOULD support RFC 6437, IPv6 Flow Label Specification, >> defines the IPv6 Flow Label. Specifically: >> >> "Forwarding nodes such as routers and load distributors MUST NOT >> depend only on Flow Label values being uniformly distributed. " >> >> "It is therefore RECOMMENDED that source hosts support the flow >> label by setting the flow label field for all packets of a given >> flow to the same value chosen from an approximation to a discrete >> uniform distribution. " > > I support this (and the proposed text), as long as it doesn't cause > more than three or four weeks' delay.
The language feels right for a de-novo -bis. OTOH, it strikes me as going well beyond an AUTH48 change. Given IETF week, I personally doubt this big a change can be accomplished in four weeks -- but that's a question for Jari, not me. I'd also support a lesser change, merely an Informative ref, just pointing out the new RFC (which I _would_ have the nerve to ask for as an AUTH49 change). Either way, I hope that a -ter becomes a milestone not more than 12-18 months from now. (If done soon enough, it shouldn't be that hard!) -- John Leslie <j...@jlc.net> -------------------------------------------------------------------- IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6 --------------------------------------------------------------------
