RE: ECN and ISOC: request for help...

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Yo Christian!

Actually, RFC 3168 has nothing to do with it.  The issue is RFC 793.

RFC 793 is a "Standard", not a "Proposed Standard"

RFC 793 lists the bits later used by ECN as "Reserved".  Computer programs
are supposed to ignore "Reserved" bits unless they really know what
they are doing.

If a router treats bits in the header as required by the STANDARD RFC
793 then RFC 3168 will cause no harm.    I do not have a copy of Baker
handy, but I bet it agrees.

RGDS
GARY
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary E. Miller Rellim 20340 Empire Blvd, Suite E-3, Bend, OR 97701
	gem@rellim.com  Tel:+1(541)382-8588 Fax: +1(541)382-8676

On Tue, 23 Jul 2002, Christian Huitema wrote:

> 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.


[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]