[Diffserv] Re: FlowId and FlowIdOrAny

Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de> Tue, 21 January 2003 12:53 UTC

Received: from www1.ietf.org (ietf.org [] (may be forged)) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA27774 for <diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 07:53:42 -0500 (EST)
Received: (from mailnull@localhost) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) id h0LDBEj14989 for diffserv-archive@odin.ietf.org; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:11:14 -0500
Received: from www1.ietf.org (localhost.localdomain []) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0LD4SJ13761; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:04:28 -0500
Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org []) by www1.ietf.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h0LCseJ13277 for <diffserv@optimus.ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 07:54:40 -0500
Received: from agitator.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (ietf-mx.ietf.org []) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id HAA26970 for <diffserv@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 07:36:35 -0500 (EST)
Received: from hansa.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (hansa.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de []) by agitator.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.12.6/8.12.6/Debian-6Woody) with ESMTP id h0LCdmgQ024811 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL); Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:39:48 +0100
Received: from hansa.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (schoenw@localhost []) by hansa.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian -4) with ESMTP id h0LCdlAa029668 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=FAIL); Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:39:47 +0100
Received: (from schoenw@localhost) by hansa.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de (8.12.3/8.12.3/Debian -4) id h0LCdh8T029652; Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:39:43 +0100
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 13:39:43 +0100
Message-Id: <200301211239.h0LCdh8T029652@hansa.ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
From: Juergen Schoenwaelder <schoenw@ibr.cs.tu-bs.de>
To: bwijnen@lucent.com
CC: bwijnen@lucent.com, rap@ops.ietf.org, diffserv@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B155BADE65@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com> (bwijnen@lucent.com)
References: <7D5D48D2CAA3D84C813F5B154F43B155BADE65@nl0006exch001u.nl.lucent.com>
Subject: [Diffserv] Re: FlowId and FlowIdOrAny
Sender: diffserv-admin@ietf.org
Errors-To: diffserv-admin@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: diffserv@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12
Precedence: bulk
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv>, <mailto:diffserv-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: Diffserv Discussion List <diffserv.ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:diffserv@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:diffserv-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/diffserv>, <mailto:diffserv-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>

>>>>> Wijnen, Bert (Bert) writes:

Bert> Now... if we do this, then this could still be used by the
Bert> framework pib.  However, for the diffserv-mib it would mean they
Bert> must deprecate a current object and create a new one (switching
Bert> from Unsigned to Integer32 causes a change on the wire!).

Oops, I missed that part of the picture. So if there is concensus to
change the range as a bug fix in the DIFFSERV0MIB without introducing
a new object (which formally the SMIv2 would require to do), then
using Unsigned32 makes some sense. Note that this will also most
likely include the definition of a DEFVAL which is in fact the new
value.  However, if we decided that it is safer to use deprecate the
filter obejct and introduce a new one, I prefer to use Integer32.

BTW, this is what I found in the INTEGRATED-SERVICES-MIB:

    intSrvFlowFlowId OBJECT-TYPE
        SYNTAX      INTEGER (0..16777215)
        MAX-ACCESS  read-only
        STATUS      current
           "The flow ID that  this  sender  is  using,  if
           this  is  an IPv6 session."
       ::= { intSrvFlowEntry 11 }

Note that this range is [0..2^24-1] while the other definitions under
discussion use a range of [0..2^20-1]. Note that RFC 2460 says:

:    Flow Label           20-bit flow label.  See section 6.


Juergen Schoenwaelder    <http://www.informatik.uni-osnabrueck.de/schoenw/>
diffserv mailing list
Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/diffserv/current/maillist.html