[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: WG next steps
On Mon, 18 Nov 2002, Brian E Carpenter wrote:
> > > Do we think it is worthwhile to continue down the network/routing based
> > > solutions? The lack of feedback on my draft suggests people aren't very
> > > interested in working on this. If we want to do this at the routing
> > > level, we have start exploring less obvious stuff. For instance, using
> > > the flow label or diffserv code points to swim across the default zone
> > > towards a network that knows more specific routing information.
> The DSCP is definitely not available for that; please read RFC 2474.
Can you be more specific?
> I would be amazed if the flow label became available for that. We do have
> clear consensus in IPv6 that it's an immutable e2e field.
What we'd need for something like this is a field in the header (well,
it could be in an option but that increases overhead) that routers could
look at when making routing decisions, but can be changed without
breaking higher layers. Being able to change the field en route would be
useful but may not be absolutely necessary.