Re: reopening ECN bugreport/netbase
Thanks for caring Anthony!
Zitiere Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au>:
> I'm not sure what you mean by "idealism" but surely it's obvious the
> solution that's closest to ideal for the most users should be chosen as
> the default. We've currently had what options?
>
> 1) Disable ECN in the kernel, and let people who want it recompile
> the kernel by hand. Pros: doesn't hurt anyone, follows the upstream
> kernel defaults. Cons: makes it hard for people to enable, which
> in the long term damages the Internet's resiliance to DoS attacks.
>
> 2) Leave ECN in the kernel, but disable it externally by default.
> Pros:
doesn't hurt anyone, makes it easy to change. Cons: requires
> kludging
around in other packages (boot-floppies and procps/netbase)
Cons for procps: solving it here is a techincally bad choice, since
it would require procps to decide to assign the flag based on available kernel options. Which is doable for this specific problem but is not a
general solution for similar problems.
Pros netbase: The message "ECN disabled: use /etc/network/options to enable"
keeps reminding the user which rises the probability that s/he will enable it later and so serve the purpose of ECN in the first place.
> 3) Leave ECN in the kernel, enabled by default. Pros: easy to setup,
> easy
to change after the fact. Cons: neophytes can easily be confused
> when
random sites start not working unpredictably from Debian machines
> but work fine elsewhere.
Cons: if upstream doesn't accept the changed default and include it, there
forever be a fork between Debian an the main kernel. Changing the default
upstream will cause a lot of trouble there which makes it not very probable.
IMO this would be the cleanest solution though.
> Another option, which would require a minor patch to the kernel, would
> be
to have ECN default to disabled even when compiled into the kernel (and
> thus require an explit 'echo 1 >/proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn' to enable).
> This'd be analagous to the current behaviour with IP forwarding.
>
> There might be other options too.
Both 1) and 3) would require action from the kernel-image maintainer, which
requires someone else than me talking to him since he's either not seeing
ECN as his problem at all:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=110862&msg=8
or just ignoring my reports:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=110862&msg=14
*t
Reply to: