Re: 2.4.x Kernel, ECN And Problem Websites
On Wednesday 25 April 2001 14:16, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > Why enable ECN at all, if all it effectively does is break stuff?
> > > AFAIK, there's no systems out "in the wild" that actually use ECN to
> > > make a difference. All that's happening is that peoples' systems are
> > > being broken. Which is sub-optimal.
> > With that attitude we would still be using 8bit systems with black&white
> > monitors.
> It may be a minor catch-22, but ECN is currently so broken, that only power
> users should be using it, as the rest will just continue flooding the
> netfilter list with "Netfilter breaks all my websites!". [OK, ECN isn't
> broken, the routers are, I know, but same effect. ECN breaks stuff]. So, if
> you're smart enough to know that you want ECN, and smart enough to
> understand the consequences, you should be compiling your own kernel.
> No way should we be pushing ECN to the masses. It should stay in the domain
> of people like DaveM, until routers get fixed.
No. ECN should be compiled in to all kernels! The issue is whether the
sysctl is set to enable it by default or not.
I think that we should all be using ECN and reporting the bugs to the people
who run the broken routers. Hotmail have fixed their routers. I have
reported the problems to Compaq regarding their routers.
It's not that difficult to track down the offending sites and report the
problem to the network administrators!
http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/postal/ Postal SMTP/POP benchmark
http://www.coker.com.au/projects.html Projects I am working on
http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page