On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 04:39:30PM -0700, Neil Spring wrote: > > Incidentaly I'd today filled a *critical* bugreport against > > kernel-image-2.4.8 just because of that. > > It lists as "Done"; perhaps you're expected to file it > someplace else? > > > The first *experimental* rfc for ECN dates from 1999. That's not like ages. > > There's a lot of equipment online from that time. > > No. IP and TCP have been around a little longer. The bits > that ECN uses are RESERVED. Reserved means "this will > be used someday" not "this must be zero for the packet > to be valid", and certainly not "set this bit to zero". > > Blaming ECN for faulty IP implementations is wrong. > Calling a box that reaches inside your IP frame to zero > a bit in the TCP header a "router" is just wrong (this is > what the Zyxel thing does wrong). > > Finally, just a warning: calling it *experimental* is only > going to last a little while longer. It's been approved as > a Proposed Standard, and is just waiting for it's RFC number. > (don't think proposed is meaningless: SACK is just a proposed > standard. header compression is just a proposed standard).
ECN is RFC2481 http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2481.txt?number=2481 -- Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT "Oh My God! They killed init! You Bastards!" --from a /. post \_|_/ Andago \/ \/ Av. Santa Engracia, 54 a n d a g o |-- E-28010 Madrid - tfno:+34(91)2041100 /\___/\ http://www.andago.com / | \ "Innovando en Internet" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
