Re: [MEXT] about the nature of "flows" Re: weird idea about flow bindings

[Hesham Soliman <hesham at elevatemobile.com>]

George, 

One comment here.



>> 
>> correct
> 
> GT> Just to make sure we are on the same page, do you agree that flow
> label is not sufficient, and that other IP and transport layer fields
> need to be used too? i.e., are you only against adding the Pointers to
> binary filter rules? or you want to limit the fields used further?

=> The only reason IMO the flow label is not sufficient on its own for a
spec right now is that it's not used. If it were used as specified then it
would in fact replace upper layer information. That's what it is designed to
do.

Hesham