Sign in
Version 5.13.0, 2015-03-25
Report a bug

Using the IPv6 Flow Label for Equal Cost Multipath Routing and Link Aggregation in Tunnels

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 02 and is now closed.

Summary: Needs 8 more YES or NO OBJECTION positions to pass.

[Adrian Farrel]

Comment (2011-07-13 for -)

There is no mention of the fact that individual nodes in a network are free to
implement different algorithms without impacting the interoperability or
function of the network.

[Peter Saint-Andre]

Comment (2011-07-11 for -)

I agree with the DISCUSS from Pete Resnick that this seems like a Standards
Track document, not a BCP.

[Robert Sparks]

Comment (2011-07-11 for -)

I found this document clear and hope it has the impact the group intends.
I support Pete's discuss though - why did the group choose BCP as the intended
status for this document?

[Stewart Bryant]

Comment (2011-07-13 for -05)

A reference to draft-ietf-mpls-entropy-label-00 would seem appropriate since
they seek to achieve the same though at different layers.


Comment (2011-07-14 for -)

Maybe add (e.g., by using IPsec between the two tunnel end-points) to the end
of the 2nd sentence in the security considerations.  Just to provide an example
of how it might be done.