Re: sysctl should disable ECN by default
Neil Spring wrote on Sun Sep 02, 2001 um 02:05:57PM:
> 1) why not disable ECN in kernel-image? it would be cleaner.
See mail from Herbert.
> 2) why not disable ECN in /etc/network/options? it would be
> more relevant and visible than sysctl.conf.
Another good idea.
> (*) wha? no kernel patch is required. The default
Not really true.
> distribution of the kernel, as distributed by Linus Himself
> leaves ECN off. Somewhere, someone decided to turn it on.
- If ECN support is compiled, it is turned on by default.
- If we wish to have support for it, we have to enable it.
- When we enable it, it will be enabled by default.
> Can we just choose option (a) and be done with it?
> If Debian isn't going to choose option (a), why are we
> talking about option (c)?
See Herbert's mail. IMHO we need a good place to disable it and notify
> I think if Herbert believes that ECN should be enabled
> in the kernel, that's an intentional statement about
> his confidence in ECN. A later, standard package that
> reconfigures the kernel at runtime seems inelegant when
> the same configuration could easily be made just once
> in the kernel config.
All this is said before. I oppose strongly the use of such experimental
features in precompiled kernel images. If the are used, than not turned
on by default. If the kernel patching is not acceptable, we need a
runtime-solution to disable it, I don't see any other ways.
> > Okay, why not just put the line into sysctl.conf and present a big
> > warning in the baseconfig?
> I'm sorry, I'm not familiar with what a warning in
> baseconfig would mean. Would I see it once? many times?
> at upgrade? only on the initial install?
A good question. Theoreticaly first time when a 2.4.x kernel-image is
installed. A hook in the kernel's postinst is ugly, but doable.
> Would this be printed when kernel-image is installed?
> when kernel-package is run? from netbase? something at
> all related to networking or the kernel?
On architectures with 2.4.x default kernel from baseconfig or so, on
architectures with 2.2.x kernel in the postinst of the kernel-image.
> Behind a default kernel configured with ECN disabled,
> I would prefer the patch that puts this behavior in
> /etc/network/options, since: 1) it's clear how to print
> > Is my proposal acceptable now?
> "Big warning" + "ECN disabled by default" => acceptable.
> Who am I to complain?
[ shorted director's cut, thanks for contribution ;) ]
Definition of Windows 9x:
A 32 bit upgrade to a 16 bit extensions for an 8 bit operating system
designed to run on a 4 bit processor by a 2 bit company that doesn´t
like 1 bit of competition.