⌕ Поиск по атласу

IETF · RFC · RFC6436

RFC6436 · Rationale for Update to the IPv6 Flow Label Specification

Rationale for Update to the IPv6 Flow Label Specification

Various published proposals for use of the IPv6 flow label are incompatible with its original specification in RFC 3697. Furthermore, very little practical use is made of the flow label, partly due to some uncertainties about the correct interpretation of the specification. This document discusses and motivates changes to the specification in order to clarify it and to introduce some additional flexibility. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.

Официальная английская аннотация

Various published proposals for use of the IPv6 flow label are incompatible with its original specification in RFC 3697. Furthermore, very little practical use is made of the flow label, partly due to some uncertainties about the correct interpretation of the specification. This document discusses and motivates changes to the specification in order to clarify it and to introduce some additional flexibility. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.

Связи документа

Официальный источник · 2011-11-01

Полные импортированные сведения карточки
{
  "id": "RFC6436",
  "number": 6436,
  "title_en": "Rationale for Update to the IPv6 Flow Label Specification",
  "title_ru": "",
  "summary_ru": "",
  "purpose_ru": "",
  "use_ru": "",
  "full_translation_path": "",
  "full_translation_checked_at": "",
  "full_translation_source_sha256": "",
  "architect_note_ru": "",
  "topics_ru": [],
  "translation_state": "not_prepared",
  "verification_level": "not_prepared",
  "verification_level_ru": "Русская выжимка не подготовлена",
  "verification_note_ru": "",
  "abstract_en": "Various published proposals for use of the IPv6 flow label are incompatible with its original specification in RFC 3697. Furthermore, very little practical use is made of the flow label, partly due to some uncertainties about the correct interpretation of the specification. This document discusses and motivates changes to the specification in order to clarify it and to introduce some additional flexibility. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.",
  "authors": [
    "S. Amante",
    "B. Carpenter",
    "S. Jiang"
  ],
  "organizations": [],
  "publication_date": "2011-11-01",
  "current_status": "INFORMATIONAL",
  "current_status_ru": "Информационный",
  "publication_status": "INFORMATIONAL",
  "publication_status_ru": "Информационный",
  "lifecycle": "informational",
  "lifecycle_ru": "Справочный",
  "stream": "IETF",
  "stream_ru": "IETF",
  "area": "int",
  "area_ru": "Интернет",
  "working_group": "6man",
  "source_draft": "draft-ietf-6man-flow-update-07",
  "page_count": 13,
  "doi": "10.17487/RFC6436",
  "keywords": [
    "ECMP",
    "LAG"
  ],
  "formats": [
    "TXT",
    "HTML"
  ],
  "relations": {
    "obsoletes": [],
    "obsoleted_by": [],
    "updates": [],
    "updated_by": [],
    "is_also": [],
    "see_also": []
  },
  "links": {
    "info": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6436/",
    "html": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6436.html",
    "txt": "https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6436.txt",
    "datatracker": "https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6436/"
  }
}