James Sutherland wrote:
> I'm sure we all know what the IETF is, and where ECN came from. I haven't
> seen anyone suggesting ignoring RST, either: DM just imagined that,
> AFAICS.
>
> The one point I would like to make, though, is that firewalls are NOT
> "brain-damaged" for blocking ECN: according to the RFCs governing
> firewalls, and the logic behind their design, blocking packets in an
> unknown format (i.e. with reserved bits set) is perfectly legitimate. Yes,
> those firewalls should be updated to allow ECN-enabled packets
> through. However, to break connectivity to such sites deliberately just
> because they are not supporting an *experimental* extension to the current
> protocols is rather silly.
Do keep in mind, we aren't breaking connectivity, they are.
-b
-
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 : Wed Jan 31 2001 - 21:00:29 EST