Re: [BEHAVE] IPv6 Flow Label

[Hesham Soliman <hesham@elevatemobile.com>]

>> => I don't understand two points: - Why is the IPv6 address/header
>> being re-written? - If there is a good answer for the above question
>> then why would you ignore the flow label and not copy it across?
> 
> The destination address of a packet received by a TURN relay is the
> address of the relay.

=> This suggests to me that you have to distinct connections:
Node - relay
Relay - someone else

   That of the packet it forwards, with the same data
>   field, is the address of the next IP layer destination node (the
> destination host or an itermediate NAT).

=> Did you mean NAT? I thought we're talking about IPv6.

> 
> RFC 3697 has a rule that non zero flow labels that leave a node MUST be
> all different for current flows having the same source-destination pair.
> 
> If flow labels received by a TURN relay from two different sources
> happen to be the same while the next IP destination happens to be the
> same NAT, copying flow labels will infringe the rule.

=> I don't know why we're talking about NATs and IPv6. It sounds like a
flawed assumption from the beginning.
There are two situations I can think of that you might be referring to (I
haven't read TURN since 2004)
1. Two connections, node - TURN relay and TURN relay - another node. I have
a feeling this is not the case you have in mind.
2. Node - intermediate strange relay that overwrites headers - end node

There is no need for scenario 2 in IPv6.

If this is in effort to do something for Ipv6 NATs I think it's a waste of
time and adds confusion for the Internet as a whole.

Hesham