From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] Route ICMPv6 errors with the flow when ECMP in use Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 11:23:31 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20161027.112331.1872860838376990837.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1477301332-23954-1-git-send-email-jkbs@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: jkbs@redhat.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:53722 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933351AbcJ0PXn (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Oct 2016 11:23:43 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1477301332-23954-1-git-send-email-jkbs@redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Jakub Sitnicki Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 11:28:47 +0200 > However, for it to work IPv6 flow labels have to be same in both > directions (i.e. reflected) or need to be chosen in a manner that > ensures that the flow going in the opposite direction would actually > be routed to a given path. My understanding is that this is not really guaranteed, and that entities are nearly encouraged to set the flow label in whatever manner makes sense for their use case. I think we really cannot have any kind of hard dependency on how flow labels are set and used by the internet.