Re: IPv6 Flow Label

[Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter@gmail.com>]

On 2008-05-06 01:21, Philip Matthews wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 5-May-08, at 08:33 , Rémi Després wrote:
>> Rémi Denis-Courmont a écrit :
>>> Le Friday 02 May 2008 22:16:02 ext Philip Matthews, vous avez écrit :
>>
>>>> TURN-08 will say that a server should copy the flow label, and if this
>>>> cannot be done, then treat the packets to/from each peer as a separate
>>>> flow with separate labels. This is all part of the new concept of a
>>>> Preserving allocation (what I called a "Fully-Compliant allocation" in
>>>> Philly) that I am in the process of adding right now.
>>> I myself am not sure what the "proper" handling of the flow infos is.
>>> If anyone knows, that would be some 6man and/or v6ops people (not
>>> including me). Flow infos is not just like DSCP. Reflecting this, the
>>> Linux(-specific) API for flow infos is completely different from that
>>> of DSCP and TTL...
>>
>> Pending any approved use of flow labels, there is IMU only one
>> consistent behavior, everywhere: the flow label field MUST be ignored
>> when received, and MUST be set to 0 when created .
>>
>> If and when some use is approved, it will be time to decide whether,
>> in TURN in particular, another behavior is more appropriate.
> 
> 
> What about RFC 3697 ??
> Are you saying that this does not describe approved behavior?

It does, of course. So the rule is really only that the flow label
must be delivered *exactly* as it was set by the source host (and the
default setting is zero).  TURN has to obey that rule like any other
device that forwards packets.

    Brian