Subject: RE: Issue about RFC3595 - Textual Conventions for IPv6 Flow Label

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 10:07:17 +0800

Thanks to Anoop and Juergen for your clarify.

That is only my trivial suggestion of redefinition semantics for 0xFFFFF.
After all, 0xFFFFF has been a valid value of flow label. Originally, I just
think only 20-bits is enough.

To say the least, Flow label TC need really a wildcard？In a application, a
wildcard could be represented by FlowLabelValue>0 or FlowLabelValue<>0.
Thus, it may not redefine the semantics of "0-0xFFFFF".

best regards.

                      Juergen                                                                                
                      Schoenwaelder              收件人：  [email-masked]                             
                      <j.schoenwaelder@iu        抄送：    [email-masked]                                     
                      -bremen.de>                主题：    Re: Issue about RFC3595 - Textual Conventions for 
                      发件人： Juergen            IPv6 Flow Label                                            
                      Schoenwaelder                                                                          
                      <schoenw@iu-bremen.                                                                    
                      de>                                                                                    

                      2004-11-30 19:38                                                                       
                      j.schoenwaelder                                                                        

The flow label in an IPv6 packet does not represent -1. The TC
is called IPv6FlowLabelOrAny and the -1 stands for "any"; a special
value which is used to indicate that any flow label value is matched
in say a filter expression. If you want to represent a flow label
alone, use the IPv6FlowLabel TC defined in the same RFC.

/js

--
Juergen Schoenwaelder                          International University
Bremen
<http://www.eecs.iu-bremen.de/>                P.O. Box 750 561, 28725
Bremen, Germany

_____________________________

                      "Ghanwani, Anoop"                                                                    
                      <anoop.ghanwani@h        收件人：  <[email-masked]>                           
                      p.com>                   抄送：                                                      
                                               主题：    RE: Issue about RFC3595 - Textual Conventions for 
                                                IPv6 Flow Label                                            
                      2004-11-30 10:40                                                                     

0xfffff is a valid value of the flow label.  Zero in the packet
just means the app chose to not set it.

Anoop

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 6:25 PM
> To: Ghanwani, Anoop
> Subject: RE: Issue about RFC3595 - Textual Conventions for
> IPv6 Flow Label
>
>
>
> Thank you for your rapid reply.
> Why not using FFFFF(Hex) to represent a wildcard? Since a
> flow label of
> zero is used to indicate packets not part of any flow.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>                       "Ghanwani, Anoop"
>
>                       <anoop.ghanwani@h        收件人：
> <[email-masked]>
>                       p.com>                   抄送：
>
>                                                主题：    RE:
> Issue about RFC3595 - Textual Conventions for
>                                                 IPv6 Flow
> Label
>                       2004-11-30 10:11
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yes, but the MIB object has 32-bits.  In the packet you will
> have individual flow labels of 20-bits.  In configuration, if you
> need to represent a wildcard, you would do that using
> all 32-bits.
>
> Anoop
>
> --
> Anoop Ghanwani | Procurve Networking | 916.785.1760 | [email-masked]
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > Sent: Monday, November 29, 2004 6:10 PM
> > To: Ghanwani, Anoop
> > Subject: RE: Issue about RFC3595 - Textual Conventions for
> > IPv6 Flow Label
> >
> >
> >
> > But flow label has only fixed 20-bits in IPv6 base header,
> hasn't it?
> > Thanks.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >                       "Ghanwani, Anoop"
> >
> >                       <anoop.ghanwani@h        收件人：
> > <[email-masked]>
> >                       p.com>                   抄送：
> >
> >                                                主题：    RE:
> > Issue about RFC3595 - Textual Conventions for
> >                                                 IPv6 Flow
> > Label
> >                       2004-11-30 10:01
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 32-bits of all 1's.
> >
> > Anoop
> >

**********************************************

***********************************************
信息安全声明：本邮件包含信息归ZTE所有，
ZTE对该邮件拥有所有权利。请接收者注意
保密，未经发件人书面许可，不得向任何第
三方组织和个人透露本邮件所含信息的全部
或部分。以上声明仅适用于工作邮件。
Information Security  Notice：
The information contained in this mail is
solely property of  ZTE Corporation. 
This mail communication is confidential.
Recipients named above are obligated to
maintain secrecy and are not permitted to
disclose the contents of this communication
to others.
***********************************************
--------------------------------------------------------------------
IETF IPv6 working group mailing list
[email-masked]
Administrative Requests: https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ipv6
--------------------------------------------------------------------