Re: draft-nordmark-multi6-sim-00.txt

[Iljitsch van Beijnum <iljitsch@muada.com>]

On 29 okt 2003, at 18:21, Brian E Carpenter wrote:

> Er, the diffserv field isn't available for that... we use it
> for diffserv...

Using diffserv for signalling whether rewriting is allowed doesn't get 
too much in the way of regular diffserv use. (Hm, didn't we have a very 
similar discussion just recently?)

Worst case, twice the number of code points would be needed: one for 
service level x without rewriting and one for service level x with 
rewriting, one for service level y without rewriting... Best case, only 
a single DSCP would be used up: default without rewriting, in addition 
to default with rewriting and all other service levels with rewriting.

> And I wish people would think about routers that will be shipped ten 
> or fifty
> years from now. If the solution is sub-optimal for today's hardware, 
> that
> should not in itself be a show-stopper.

Interesting point. I sort of agree. I don't think it applies here, 
though. Using the diffserv bits is the most logical and cleanest choice 
if we can make it work, and I believe we can.