Subject: Re: (IPng) mechanisms for managing the flow ID field in IPv6

From: [email-masked] (Noel Chiappa)
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 94 23:42:51 -0500

From: [email-masked] (Bob Hinden)

    Can we please have this discussion on only one list. I think ipng,
    end2end, flows, and int-serv is three too many.

Sounds good to me.

    I propose that it be only on ipng.

For the specific details of how to use the IPv6 flow field, this makes sense,
and those should move there, but we seem to be have diverted into a generic
discussion about flows, actually. I'd think it makes sense to keep those
abstract, theoretical discussions out of the hair of people who are actually
trying to do work, i.e. not on IPng.

	Noel

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 94 02:33:13 -0500

Noel,

>trying to do work, i.e. not on IPng.

I agree.  Thanks.  But the work is on IPng and its real.  Several of us
have implementations that have flow IDs in the network layer.  What we
do with them is the next question but some of it is debugged as far a
UNIX kernels go.   But actually using it is not debugged.

I was a bit confused on "...i.e. not on IPng..." we are doing real
engineering work on IPng fyi, or did I miss something in your context?

Because IPng is NO LONGER RESEARCH but moved to ADVANCED DEVELOPMENT and
the prototypes of today will be the base for products soon.

/jim