> One of this router leads to the ISOC web site. what is funny is to see the > above RFC is copyright ISOC. Could someone located in the Washington DC area > please contact the ISOC people and help them to be RFC compliant... Your reference to "RFC compliance" is somewhat mistaken. First, it misrepresents what RFC compliance means: the FOO explains how to do FOO; a system is compliant if it chooses to do FOO in a manner compatible with the RFC, and non compliant if it chooses an incompatible variant; however, a system that does not do FOO is neither compliant nor non-compliant, it just does not do it. There is absolutely no IETF mandate that all systems implement all RFC. Second, RFC 3168 is a "Proposed Standard". To quote RFC 2026: Implementors should treat Proposed Standards as immature specifications. It is desirable to implement them in order to gain experience and to validate, test, and clarify the specification. However, since the content of Proposed Standards may be changed if problems are found or better solutions are identified, deploying implementations of such standards into a disruption-sensitive environment is not recommended. So, if you are on a campaign to promote ECN, then maybe you should first try to promote this specification to the next standard level... You may also want to take a stab at revising the "Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers"; the last edition, RFC 1812 by Fred Baker, dates from June 1995. -- Christian Huitema