On Sat, Jan 27, 2001 at 02:20:32PM -0500, Gregory Maxwell wrote: > > Why? Why not just zero them, and get both security and compatibility... > Eeek! NO!!!! NO NO NO NO NO NO NO! > For ECN that would have worked, but that doesn't mean that something > couldn't have been implimented there that wouldn't have worked that way.. > I think that older Checkpoint firewalls (perhaps current?) zeroed out SACK > on 'hide nat'ed connections. This causes unreasonable stalls for users on > SACK enabled clients. Not cool. Point taken. So much for thinking simple... :-} -- Frank v Waveren Fingerprint: 0EDB 8787 fvw@[var.cx|dse.nl|stack.nl|chello.nl] ICQ#10074100 09B9 6EF5 6425 B855 Public key: http:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 7179 3036 E136 B85D - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN David S. Miller
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN H. Peter Anvin
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Helge Hafting
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Rick Jones
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Rusty Russell
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Alan Cox
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN David Wagner
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Brian May
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Frank v Waveren
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Gregory Maxwell
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Frank v Waveren
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Jamie Lokier
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Gregory Maxwell
- RE: hotmail not dealing with ECN David Schwartz
- RE: hotmail not dealing with ECN James Sutherland
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Gregory Maxwell
- [OT] Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Gregory Maxwell
- Re: [OT] Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Michael H. Warfield
- Re: [OT] Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Gregory Maxwell
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN James Sutherland
- Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN Gregory Maxwell