Rogier Wolff wrote:
> The "we'll turn it on in February" warning is worth NOTHING in this
> situation: February comes and goes. March comes and goes. Everybody
> who read the warning will think: Ok, so I must be fine.
>
> A warning of the form: "ECN will go on as soon as this message clears
> the
Folks, herewith I declare this topic ("ECN is on") TABOO, if
you want to continue discussing it, do that at linux-kernel
WITH NEW TOPIC.
My original message had reply-to pointing to linux-kernel,
but all it takes is single person to ignore that...
Spare the other lists, my origi
Richard Gooch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Sure, Dave is being bloody-minded, but that's the only way we'll see
> people get off their fat, lazy asses and fix their broken systems.
> In fact, hopefully he's still in a dark mood, and he may take up the
> suggestion to bounce mails of the followin
FOLKS, I HAVE ALL THE TIME USED 'Reply-To:' HEADER POINTING
TO linux-kernel -- INSTEAD OF ALL THE LISTS...
If you want to continue this, do it there.
(Before I decide to taboo "Re: ECN is on!" subject line..)
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 12:23:29PM -0400, Richard Goo
PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: ECN is on!
Rogier Wolff wrote:
> The "we'll turn it on in February" warning is worth NOTHING in this
> situation: February comes and goes. March comes and goes. Everybody
> who read the warning will
Tony Hoyle writes:
> Richard Gooch wrote:
>
> > In fact, hopefully he's still in a dark mood, and he may take up the
> > suggestion to bounce mails of the following type:
> > - MIME encoded
> > - HTML encoded
> > - quoted printables (those stupid "=20" things are particuarly hard to
> > read).
Matti Aarnio writes:
> On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 09:06:25AM -0400, Richard Gooch wrote:
> ...
> > Sure, Dave is being bloody-minded, but that's the only way we'll see
> > people get off their fat, lazy asses and fix their broken systems.
> > In fact, hopefully he's still in a dark mood, and he may t
Richard Gooch wrote:
> Dave sent a message out a week or two ago saying he was going to do it
> soon. And back in January he said he'd be doing it in February. The
> kernel list FAQ has stated this right at the top, in big, bright red
> letters. Yesterday, after I saw Dave's announcement, I update
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 05:00:22PM +0100, Tony Hoyle wrote:
> > suggestion to bounce mails of the following type:
> > - MIME encoded
> > - HTML encoded
> > - quoted printables (those stupid "=20" things are particuarly hard to
> > read).
>
> Surely it'd be better to get the list to filter them
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 09:06:25AM -0400, Richard Gooch wrote:
...
> Sure, Dave is being bloody-minded, but that's the only way we'll see
> people get off their fat, lazy asses and fix their broken systems.
> In fact, hopefully he's still in a dark mood, and he may take up the
> suggestion to boun
Richard Gooch wrote:
> In fact, hopefully he's still in a dark mood, and he may take up the
> suggestion to bounce mails of the following type:
> - MIME encoded
> - HTML encoded
> - quoted printables (those stupid "=20" things are particuarly hard to
> read).
Surely it'd be better to get the l
Brent D. Norris writes:
> > I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
> > get people to fix their kit.
> >
> > We will remove these people, that's all.
>
> Isn't this a problem though because the messge saying that ECN was
> enabled was set after ECN was enabled? Thus
Alan Cox writes:
> > Matti Aarnio writes:
> > > I am contemplating to periodically turn off the ECN bit to
> > > let email out, but DaveM has veto there.
> >
> > I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
> > get people to fix their kit.
> >
> > We will remove these p
"David S. Miller" wrote:
>
> Matti Aarnio writes:
> > I am contemplating to periodically turn off the ECN bit to
> > let email out, but DaveM has veto there.
>
> I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
> get people to fix their kit.
>
> We will remove these people
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 06:51:57AM -0500, Brent D. Norris wrote:
> > I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
> > get people to fix their kit.
> >
> Isn't this a problem though because the messge saying that ECN was enabled
> was set after ECN was enabled? Thus these p
Matti Aarnio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> ... and immediately I have been able to verify a bunch of
> domains/servers which won't get thru when incoming connection
> has ECN.
As a matter of interest, are you also noting how many actually
negotiate ECN rather than simply responding with a "plain
> I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
> get people to fix their kit.
>
Isn't this a problem though because the messge saying that ECN was enabled
was set after ECN was enabled? Thus these people have no idea what is
going on and they probably won't know what to fi
On Tue, May 22, 2001 at 01:10:31PM +0300, Matti Aarnio wrote:
> This list is NOT exhaustive of domains with problems, it
> primarily lists only those who are subscribers of linux-kernel,
> and thus accumulated (al lot) more than 1 email with "connection
> timed out" status into vger's queue.
>
>
> Matti Aarnio writes:
> > I am contemplating to periodically turn off the ECN bit to
> > let email out, but DaveM has veto there.
>
> I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
> get people to fix their kit.
>
> We will remove these people, that's all.
Since HTML em
Matti Aarnio writes:
> I am contemplating to periodically turn off the ECN bit to
> let email out, but DaveM has veto there.
I veto, the whole point of moving to ECN was to make a statement and
get people to fix their kit.
We will remove these people, that's all.
Later,
David S. Miller
[EMAI
20 matches
Mail list logo
