[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FW: FlowId and FlowIdOrAny
Hi -
My concerns regarding suitability for indexing (as in
policy-like things) have already been noted.
Randy
----- Original Message -----
From: "Wijnen, Bert (Bert)" <bwijnen@lucent.com>
To: "Mreview (E-mail)" <mreview@ops.ietf.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2003 6:36 AM
Subject: FW: FW: FlowId and FlowIdOrAny
> Since I am ready to ask the flowlabel draft to be
> put on IESG agenda, are there any supporting or
> dis-agreeing opinions in this team of MIB doctors.
>
> Randy Presuhn wondered:
> > > FlowIdOrAny TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
> > > DISPLAY-HINT "d"
> > > STATUS current
> > > DESCRIPTION "The flow identifier or flow lable in an IPv6
> > > header that may be used to discriminate traffic
> > > flows. The value of -1 is used to indicate a
> > > wildcard, i.e. any value.
> > > "
> > > SYNTAX Integer32 (-1 | 0..1048575)
> > ...
> >
> > Does it worry anyone else that objects defined using this TC would
> > not be usable in INDEX clauses?
>
> I have seen Andy say:
> > >Does it worry anyone else that objects defined using this TC would
> > >not be usable in INDEX clauses?
> >
> > No. If there are any MIBs planned or in progress that want to
> > create a table that would need to model a 'wildcard flow' then
> > I would change my mind. Is 1048576 a safe choice?
>
> And Juergen said
> > Randy> Does it worry anyone else that objects defined using this TC
> > Randy> would not be usable in INDEX clauses?
> >
> > At least we have the same limitation in the DscpOrAny definition. ;-)
> >
>
> For now, I have left the -1 value as per below.
> please respond ASAP.
>
> Thanks,
> Bert
> ------------------
>
> IPv6FlowLabelOrAny ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION
> DISPLAY-HINT "d"
> STATUS current
> DESCRIPTION "The flow identifier or Flow Label in an IPv6
> packet header that may be used to discriminate
> traffic flows. The value of -1 is used to
> indicate a wildcard, i.e. any value.
> "
> SYNTAX Integer32 (-1 | 0..1048575)
>