Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 28 Jan 2001 13:08:40 -0500 (EST) | From | jamal <> | Subject | Re: ECN: Clearing the air (fwd) |
| |
On Sun, 28 Jan 2001, Rogier Wolff wrote:
> jamal wrote: > > > 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. > > > > > > > This is the way it's done with all protocols. or i should say the way it > > used to be done. How do you expect ECN to be deployed otherwise? > > Thinking about this a bit more: > > A sufficiently paranoid firewall should block requests that he doesn't > fully understand. ECN was in this category, so old firewalls are > "right" to block these. (Sending an 'RST' is not elegant. So be it.) > > However, ECN is now "understood", and operators are now in a position > to configure their firewall to "do the right thing". This is
This would have been easier. The firewall operators were not provided with this option. This is hard-coded. I agree with the rest of your message.
cheers, jamal
- 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/
| |