Re: reopening ECN bugreport/netbase
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 04:32:42PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > severity 110892 wishlist
> > thanks
> > On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 02:42:23PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
> > > # On Sun, 2 Sep 2001 06:31:19 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > > # > On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 12:33:35PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
> > > # > > I don't know if this is the right place to assign the bug.
> > It's not a bug at all really, and it's certainly not a "critical" one.
> >From the docu:
> critical makes unrelated software on the system (or the whole system)
> break, [...]
> This is *exacly* what happens after an update from a vanilla 2.2.x kernel
> to a 2.4. Some sites plain disapear from the internet, which is not a
> catastrophy. What's worse is that with some routers you will *completely*
> loose TCP network connectivity. If you happen to be using your box as a
> firewall it's the whole LAN that'll be dropped.
> How does this differ from the phrasing ".. or the whole system) break"?
> Does there need some physical violence be involved to fullfill the
> requirements for a critical bugreport?
> > If
> > you happen not to like ECN on your systems add "sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn=0"
> > to /etc/sysctl.conf (which is a much better place for such things than
> > /etc/network/options) and be done with it.
> I couldn't care less about ECN or whatever acronym. The problem is that
> "the whole system) break"s. That's a problem. And this will happen at
> every single site that f.ex. is using an mildly old Zyxel router.
Routers aren't forced to support ECN (although it's in their interest) but they
aren't allowed to drop ECN-flagged TCP packets.
If you can't access a site, *they* need to fix their buggy router to be
ECN-tolerant. If they don't do so, they're violating RFC 793.
Eric VAN BUGGENHAUT "Oh My God! They killed init! You Bastards!"
--from a /. post
\/ \/ Av. Santa Engracia, 54
a n d a g o |-- E-28010 Madrid - tfno:+34(91)2041100
/ | \ "Innovando en Internet"