On 25/04/05, Steven Blake wrote:
> > Other than that, using the label for 6LSAs would just spare the need
> > to encapsulate the packet with MPLS.
> How do you stack flow labels?
Ofcourse if you need multiple label stacks you'll have to either
encapsulate it by another IPv6 header (oversized for
Hi Brian and all,
On 25/04/05, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> Until 6LSA explains how it will restore the label to its
> original value, or the IETF changes its mind about immutability
> of the label, this just isn't going to happen. I think that's
> why the 6LSA people wrote their recent draft.
On t
Hello all,
On 22/04/05, David Malone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Using the flow label to validate recieved ICMP error messages is
> quite appealing in light of draft-gont-tcpm-icmp-attacks-03. It
> could also be used for validating ICMP messages generated by UDP
> packets, where sequence numbers
Hi,
I've been reading a few drafts and RFCs in this matter and I couldn't
find an explanation why the Flow Label field has to read the
destination with the same value the source sent it.
Wouldn't it introduce a whole lot of new capabilities (without as many
limitations) if the Flow Label field ha
