I take advantage of my slot here to also talk about the fact that I
believe Flow Labels and IPv6 Flows in general are little known in MEXT.
For example the MEXT WG defines an "IPv6 flow" to be a "group of packets
matching a traffic selector", different than the rfc3697 idea of
"3-tuple of the Flow Label and the Source and Destination Address fields
enables efficient IPv6 flow classification".
MEXT's draft-ietf-mext-flow-binding-06 goes further and defines "A flow
identifier uniquely identifies a flow binding associated with a mobile
node. It is generated by a mobile node and is cached in the table of
flow binding entries maintained by the MN, HA, CN or MAP.".
No MEXT mentioning of "Flow Label", but the same spirit - because a flow
binding is actually a pair of addresses to which one adds an 16bit (not
20) id.
MEXT Mobile IPv6 using the _spirit_ of IPv6 flows (3-tuple
address-address-id), and the term "flow" but _not_ the IPv6 Flow Label
field was very surprising to me at the time of proposal.
Now I am surprised 6MAN proposes to modify the IPv6 Flow Label - what
does this mean to MEXT Mobile IPv6? Is 6MAN proposing new Flow Label
behaviour in order to be better in MEXT (doesn't seem so, mutability
wasn't requested in MEXT)? Or just ROLL?
For whom is this Flow Label update intended?
Alex
Le 14/04/2010 19:21, Alexandru Petrescu a écrit :
Hi, I came across this draft coming from the ROLL space where a
proposal exists to use the Flow Label changed enroute maybe.
Besides the fact that I find ROLL use of such spec of 6MAN not being
ready, i.e. in its infance (I will suggest that to the ROLL WG), I
have a general comment here in 6MAN.
Modifying a field of an IP packet "en-route" is something which
comes with a price tag: obviously slower. Generally speaking writing
takes much longer than reading.
I find this proposal to change the Flow Label behaviour to come in
too early, at a point where we don't yet have widespread use of
simple Flow Labels (or is it widely used?).
I wouldn't touch on any IP field enroute... there exist already
exceptions allowing to touch enroute and they're not widely used
either (RH, HbH, etc.)
Alex
Le 18/02/2010 04:34, Brian E Carpenter a écrit :
Hi,
This may seem a bit unexpected, but after working on
draft-carpenter-flow-ecmp (just updated) and working with my
student Qinwen Hu on some aspects of the flow label, it seemed like
time for another look at the flow label standard, and Sheng Jiang
was having similar thoughts.
We'd like to discuss this in Anaheim if possible.
Brian
-------- Original Message -------- Subject: I-D
Action:draft-carpenter-6man-flow-update-00.txt Date: Wed, 17 Feb
2010 18:15:02 -0800 (PST) From: internet-dra...@ietf.org Reply-To:
internet-dra...@ietf.org To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org
A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
directories.
Title : Update to the IPv6 flow label specification Author(s) : B.
Carpenter, S. Jiang Filename :
draft-carpenter-6man-flow-update-00.txt Pages : 9 Date :
2010-02-17
Various uses proposed for the IPv6 flow label are incompatible
with its existing specification. This document describes changes to
the specification that permit additional use cases as well as
allowing continued use of the previous specification.
A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-carpenter-6man-flow-update-00.txt
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative
Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list ipv6@ietf.org Administrative
Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
ipv6@ietf.org
Administrative Requests: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------
