Re: hotmail not dealing with ECN

[H. Peter Anvin]

"Adam J. Richter" wrote:
> 
>         I am surprised that anyone is seriously considering denying
> service to sites that do not implement an _experimental_ facility
> and have firewalls that try to play things safe by dropping packets
> which have 1's in bit positions that in the RFC "must be zero."
> 
>         If Microsoft were to do this with their favorite experimental
> network extensions for msnbc.com, how do you think the non-Microsoft
> world would feel and react?  Well, that's about how the rest of
> the world is likely to view this.
> 
>         That said, I wonder if some tweak to the Linux networking
> stack is possible whereby it would automatically disable ECN and retry
> on per socket basis if the connection establishment otherwise seems to
> be timing out.  This may be tricky given that the purpose of this
> facility is congestion notification, but, if someone is smart enough
> to be able to implement this, it would provide a much less disruptive
> migration path for adoption across firewalls that drop these packets.
> Far more sites could then safely activate this feature without limiting
> the hosts that they can reach.
> 
> Adam J. Richter     __     ______________   4880 Stevens Creek Blvd, Suite 104
> [e-mail]     \ /                  San Jose, California 95129-1034
> [phone]         | g g d r a s i l   United States of America
> fax [phone]      "Free Software For The Rest Of Us."

Ummm... we already went over this.  The fundamental problem is that they
aren't dropping the packets, they are sending RST.

	-hpa

-- 
<[e-mail]> at work, <[e-mail]> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt