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

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

 



I don't see why this is embarrasing.  I have no problems with people
setting up filtering rules that say DENY-ALL accept packets that I
EXPLICITLY know what every bit does, and I want to allow it...

That said, ECN is a relatively recent addition to the suite and I
wouldn't expect all firewalling rules to be setup to use it (I believe
that some of the bits involved have been used by other experimental
protocols for other things).  For this reason I don't think this
behavior is as bad or embarrassing as you think it is.  

Bill

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf@ietf.org [mailto:owner-ietf@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Franck Martin
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 10:17 PM
To: 'Gary E. Miller'; Christian Huitema
Cc: ietf
Subject: RE: ECN and ISOC: request for help...


I'm not in a campaign to promote ECN, or anything... I'm saying that
ISOC web site is not reachable if you enable ECN, which RFC793(standard)
or RFC3168(proposed Standard) talk about.

I don't want to talk about what is a standard or what is not... What is
compliant or not...

Will there be anybody to volunteer and fix the routers leading to ISOC
web site, mailing lists, e-mail addresses and so on?

This is what my message is all about. Please IETF members in Washington
DC, Area, please give a call to ISOC and offer some help...

This is embarrassing, that's all....

Cheers.

Franck Martin
Network and Database Development Officer
SOPAC South Pacific Applied Geoscience Commission
Fiji
E-mail: franck@sopac.org <mailto:franck@sopac.org> 
Web site: http://www.sopac.org/
<http://www.sopac.org/> Support FMaps: http://fmaps.sourceforge.net/
<http://fmaps.sourceforge.net/> 
Certificate: https://www.sopac.org/ssl/ 

This e-mail is intended for its addresses only. Do not forward this
e-mail without approval. The views expressed in this e-mail may not be
necessarily the views of SOPAC.



-----Original Message-----
From: Gary E. Miller [mailto:gem@rellim.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 24 July 2002 3:02 
To: Christian Huitema
Cc: ietf
Subject: RE: ECN and ISOC: request for help...


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]