Subject: RE: draft-hinden-ipv6-host-load-sharing-00.txt

From: Thomas Eklund <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2001 09:25:26 +0100

Hi Bob,

I agree that if you dont keep your flow together that's a bad thing and you
will experience packet re-ordering. 

I also note that this is a topic where potentially the flow label could be
used. Nothing strange really, since the flowlabel identifies a flow.

-- thomas

>>While the RFC is about routers performing the loadsharing 
>over multiple
>>paths, I would think the issues it raises would probably also apply to
>>hosts.
>
>The issues are similar.  Load sharing approaches that don't keep flows 
>together are not a good thing.
>
>Bob
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------
>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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------