From: Bernd Eckenfels <ecki@lina.inka.de>
Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2000 03:38:35 +0100
Because this will add a Fallback (non ECN) packet to every denied
target. I think this is bad policy at least. It might violate the
RFCs, too. Keep in mind, we cannot recognice a rejection due to
ECN.
It does in fact violate RFCs because the fallback has to handle the
case where ECN rejection comes in the form of a (perfectly valid)
TCP reset.
Any workaround which ignores TCP resets is broken from the start and
is not to be implemented.
Later,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 07 2000 - 21:00:21 EST