(Sorry for sending an empty email by hitting the "send" by accident)
Hi Brian and Remi,
If I understand correctly, RFC 3697 allows the packet source to design how
the FL should be generated. In the GI-DS-lite case, the source is the GW
which is a trusted device inside the network, the FL will be
On 10/1/10 3:35 PM, "Brian E Carpenter" wrote:
> 2460
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--
Hi Remi,
Thanks for helping us to look into this.
Yiu
On 9/30/10 3:01 AM, "Rémi Després" wrote:
> Hi Yiu,
> Response below, with an added direct copy to Brian.
>
> Le 25 sept. 2010 à 04:14, Yiu L. Lee a écrit :
>
>> Hi gents,
>>
>> We have a d
having flow
> labels be mutable.
>
> Yours,
> Joel M. Halpern
>
> On 9/24/2010 10:14 PM, Yiu L. Lee wrote:
>> Hi gents,
>>
>> We have a design question of Flow Label. During the v6 transition, some DSL
>> providers may want to create an IPv4-in-IPv6 tunnel fr
Hi gents,
We have a design question of Flow Label. During the v6 transition, some DSL
providers may want to create an IPv4-in-IPv6 tunnel from the BRAS to the
AFTR to continue to provider v4 access over a v6 core network. To identify a
CPE behind the BRAS, we propose to use the Flow Label. Each CP
Aaah, ok. So we are on the same page ;-)
On 7/30/09 7:55 AM, "Ole Troan" wrote:
> Yiu,
>
>> IMHO, it is high bar for the operators to support dynamic routing
>> protocol
>> for residential customers. Today, each access router can easily
>> support
>> thousands of customers. Imagine the access
Hi Ole,
IMHO, it is high bar for the operators to support dynamic routing protocol
for residential customers. Today, each access router can easily support
thousands of customers. Imagine the access router needs to receive thousands
if not millions updates every few minutes, I am not sure the route
