Subject: RE: draft-rajahalme-ipv6-flow-label-00.txt

From: "Hesham Soliman (ERA)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 17:14:43 +0100

>    If you're trying to avoid exposing the encryption key, you 
  >    can use x, where x is any number that both nodes are
  >    aware of.
  > 
  > => I don't understand why the peer has to be aware of x.
  > Do you want to provide QoS inside end nodes? IMHO this is

=> No, just trying to allow the receiver to verify 
the value. Nothing to do with QoS

  > not a bad idea because the CPU is far faster than I/O subsystems,

=> I guess you meant, "it IS a bad idea" ? :)

  > BTW most implementations don't provide an API to get the received
  > flow ID or label, just because this is not considered as useful.

=> Well, some of us want to. Itojun had draft on this
for example. 

Cheers,
Hesham
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPng Working Group Mailing List
IPng Home Page:                      http://playground.sun.com/ipng
FTP archive:                      ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/ipng
Direct all administrative requests to [email-masked]
--------------------------------------------------------------------