Re: [RRG] FLOWv6: IPv6 Flow Label to control DFZ forwarding

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

On 4 aug 2008, at 11:46, Robin Whittle wrote:

> My proposal is not related to MPLS.  I will reply to your critique
> soon in the "Ivip6 (previously FLOWv6), Ivip4 and Ivip" thread.
Well, MPLS is also based on encoding routing decisions in a 20-bit  
field to avoid a full lookup... I'm not talking about the details,  
obviously.
The way I see it, the main issue is the mapping system. If we can  
figure that part out, I'm not too worried about the encapsulation  
stuff because a good modular mapping system should of course work with  
a variety of encapsulation systems. So we could use LISP as the  
default and then define additional ways to do this with MPLS and maybe  
even with light path stuff. (Electronics is sooo last century...)
The part that worries me about reusing the flow label is that the flow  
label is defined to be non-mutable-in-transit. So it would be ok for  
the source host to use the flow label in this way, but not for routers  
to change it. Also, we would still need some bits to allow for  
different flows towards the same destinations to be treated  
differently as per the original flow label semantics.
BTW, why is it Ivip and not ivip or IVIP?

--
to unsubscribe send a message to rrg-request@psg.com with the
word 'unsubscribe' in a single line as the message text body.
archive: <http://psg.com/lists/rrg/> & ftp://psg.com/pub/lists/rrg