Quoting Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Why enable ECN at all, if all it effectively does is break stuff? AFAIK, > there's no systems out "in the wild" that actually use ECN to make a > difference. All that's happening is that peoples' systems are being > broken. > Which is sub-optimal.
I would have expected something more intelligent from a "Linux kernel developer". ECN is COMPLETELY backward-compatible, and the bits it uses are reserved for it. The RFC's instruct these reserved bits to be ignored if the device does not support ECN. When firewalls silently drop packets just because they have the ECN bits set, those firewalls are broken, not Linux or ECN. In short: it's not our problem. I wish people would stop being so sensationalist about ECN. linux-kernel has been tracking delinquent sites for a few months now, and DaveM resolved to turn ECN on on vger, which would effictively cut off hotmail users from it since hotmail is (was?) one such broken site. All of a sudden Slashdot posts a FUD-filled article claiming ECN is enabled by default, isn't backward-compatible, and breaks things. I bet that's where this thread came from.
