On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 06:30:27PM -0700, Neil T. Spring wrote:
My point is: the maintainers have spoken. If we're going
to make progress in helping users behind broken equipment,
we're going to have to find another way that doesn't offend
Herbert, Craig, and Anthony's sense of idealism.
I'm
* Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010905 20:17]:
the correct solution is to NOT compile ECN support into the distribution
kernels. that's a choice that should be left up to the individual system
So, lets fix one problem by creating another problem! ECN isn't there
anymore!
What if some users
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 01:37:02AM -0500, Scott Dier wrote:
So, lets fix one problem by creating another problem! ECN isn't there
anymore!
So? Neither is a lot of options. You can recompile a kernel just
as well as anyone else.
--
David Starner - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Pointless website:
Another option, which would require a minor patch to the kernel, would be
to have ECN default to disabled even when compiled into the kernel (and
thus require an explit 'echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn' to enable).
This'd be analagous to the current behaviour with IP forwarding.
Eduard
Thanks for caring Anthony!
Zitiere Anthony Towns aj@azure.humbug.org.au:
I'm not sure what you mean by idealism but surely it's obvious the
solution that's closest to ideal for the most users should be chosen as
the default. We've currently had what options?
1) Disable ECN in the kernel,
On Thu, Sep 06, 2001 at 01:37:02AM -0500, Scott Dier wrote:
* Craig Sanders [EMAIL PROTECTED] [010905 20:17]:
the correct solution is to NOT compile ECN support into the distribution
kernels. that's a choice that should be left up to the individual system
So, lets fix one problem by
reopen 110862
# Here with I am reopening this bug.
#
# On Sun, 2 Sep 2001 06:31:19 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
#
# On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 12:33:35PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
#
# I don't know if this is the right place to assign the bug. Maybe the
# right place for this is netbase,
severity 110892 wishlist
thanks
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 02:42:23PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
# On Sun, 2 Sep 2001 06:31:19 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
# On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 12:33:35PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
# I don't know if this is the right place to assign the bug.
It's not a
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
severity 110892 wishlist
thanks
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 02:42:23PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
# On Sun, 2 Sep 2001 06:31:19 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
# On Sat, Sep 01, 2001 at 12:33:35PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
# I don't know if this is
* Tomas Pospisek
| ) then it's the kernel-image package that needs to make sure it's runing
| in a sane environment. So *please* can we add something like:
|
| if ! grep /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn /etc/sysctl.conf /dev/null;
| then echo sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn=0
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 04:32:42PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
From the docu:
critical makes unrelated software on the system (or the whole system)
break, [...]
This is *exacly* what happens after an update from a vanilla 2.2.x kernel
to a 2.4. Some sites plain disapear from
critical makes unrelated software on the system (or the whole system)
break, [...]
The user experience is broken, not the software. The software is
working fine. The really broken part is firewalls and tcp/ip stacks on
the internet that do things to TCP that they shouldn't and
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
So *please* can we add something like:
if ! grep /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn /etc/sysctl.conf /dev/null;
then echo sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn=0 /etc/sysctl.conf
fi
to the kernel-image-2.4.x postinst.
Which of course will set up
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Scott Dier wrote:
working fine. The really broken part is firewalls and tcp/ip stacks on
the internet that do things to TCP that they shouldn't and break your
experience.
Go bugreport those instead.
Never mind the users: they will be happy to spend two days debuging the
Hey Guys,
I think Anthony mistyped the bug# here. This has nothing to do
with gdk-imlib1.
Cheers,
-Steve
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 11:44:01PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
severity 110892 wishlist
thanks
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 02:42:23PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
# On Sun, 2 Sep 2001
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 04:32:42PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Anthony Towns wrote:
severity 110892 wishlist
thanks
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 02:42:23PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
# On Sun, 2 Sep 2001 06:31:19 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
# On Sat, Sep 01, 2001
I, for one, am very thankful for this thread. I could no longer
connect to some sites which I used in daily work collaborations
for some time now. Turns out it's since an upgrade from 2.2 to
2.4. I have now disabled this option in the 2.4 kernel and now
connect again.
Thanks!
(Yes, it's info
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote:
Routers aren't forced to support ECN (although it's in their interest) but
they
aren't allowed to drop ECN-flagged TCP packets.
If you can't access a site, *they* need to fix their buggy router to be
ECN-tolerant. If they don't do so, they're
Eric Van Buggenhaut wrote:
Routers aren't forced to support ECN (although it's in their
interest) but they aren't allowed to drop ECN-flagged TCP packets.
If you can't access a site, *they* need to fix their buggy router to be
ECN-tolerant. If they don't do so, they're violating RFC 793.
On Wed, 5 Sep 2001, Remco van de Meent wrote:
But anyway - I agree that Debian should not be too conservative with
regard to new networking technologies, so disabling ECN by default is
not something I'd like to see happen. Give the user some short
explanation and let him make the decision
T.Pospisek's MailLists wrote:
But anyway - I agree that Debian should not be too conservative
with regard to new networking technologies, so disabling ECN by
default is not something I'd like to see happen. Give the user some
short explanation and let him make the decision himself, I'd
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 04:32:42PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
) then it's the kernel-image package that needs to make sure it's runing
in a sane environment. So *please* can we add something like:
if ! grep /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn /etc/sysctl.conf /dev/null;
then
Wow. Somebody makes a one line suggestion (which seems
like a good idea) and you twist it into:
1. An incorrect statement. ecn is a routing
protocol. rotfl. Find a computer science textbook before
you post to the list again.
2. A configuration option, when you know concensus on this
list is
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 06:02:10PM +0200, T.Pospisek's MailLists wrote:
So since netbase does not want to be the proper place, a better
fix/workaround (I'm sincerely trying hard not to be ironic!) would be to
use debconf with a default value of 0 and to inform/ask the user about
it when
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 03:19:01PM -0800, Ethan Benson wrote:
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 06:02:10PM +0200, T.Pospisek's MailLists wrote:
So since netbase does not want to be the proper place, a better
fix/workaround (I'm sincerely trying hard not to be ironic!) would be to
use debconf with a
On 05-Sep-01, 18:14 (CDT), Neil T. Spring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. A configuration option, when you know concensus on this
list is that there will be none; and that the default will
be on.
No, I don't think that's the concensus. I agree that the kernel package
can't change another
On Wed, Sep 05, 2001 at 04:32:42PM +0200, Tomas Pospisek wrote:
if ! grep /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn /etc/sysctl.conf /dev/null;
then echo sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn=0 /etc/sysctl.conf
fi
to the kernel-image-2.4.x postinst.
no, this is broken and evil. kernel-image
On 05-Sep-01, 18:14 (CDT), Neil T. Spring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. A configuration option, when you know concensus on this
list is that there will be none; and that the default will
be on.
No, I don't think that's the concensus. I agree that the kernel package
can't change another
28 matches
Mail list logo
