[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
ECN
- Subject: ECN
- From: Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu (Valdis.Kletnieks at vt.edu)
- Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2008 12:31:22 -0500
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 07 Nov 2008 08:27:58 +0100." <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]>
On Fri, 07 Nov 2008 08:27:58 +0100, Mikael Abrahamsson said:
> for ECN to actually be useful, we (the ISPs) have to turn this option on
> in the routers as well. Is anyone doing this today? What vendors support
> it?
The only thing that's *required* for it to help is that the routers and
firewalls not actually *molest* the bits in the TCP SYN packet. If you pass
them and *do nothing else*, it at least has the potential of being useful at
some other router along the path. And let's face it - if *your* router is
congested enough for ECN to matter, there's a fairly good chance that the
router one hop up/downstream is *also* seeing some effects. Even if *you* don't
do anything else, your neighbor might - helping you out in the bargain.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 226 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.nanog.org/pipermail/nanog/attachments/20081107/392d134b/attachment.bin>
- Follow-Ups:
- ECN
- From: hank at efes.iucc.ac.il (Hank Nussbacher)
- References:
- ECN
- From: swmike at swm.pp.se (Mikael Abrahamsson)