nanog mailing list archives
Re: Smallest Transit MTU
From: Robert E.Seastrom <rs () seastrom com>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 01:00:22 -0500
Dan Hollis <goemon () anime net> writes:
Why is this a problem? ECN has to be deployed on routers, and it currently isn't.Because tcp connection endpoints have to implement ECN in order to manage the flow.
A naive reader might think from Dan's posting that the Internet didn't work at all before ECN was codified (experimental with RFC 2481 in January 1999 and standards-track with RFC 3168 in September 2001). Heck, if I didn't know better, I'd think he was trolling. Of course, I may just be a grouchy malcontent who doesn't use RED, any other kind of active queue management, or take hits from the end-to-end-QoS-bong when it is passed in my direction... since the only QoS for which I have any use is Quantity of Service. ECN has always looked to me like a solution in search of a problem, which may be why so few people have their panties in a bunch over non-support of it. ---Rob
Current thread:
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU, (continued)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Alex Bligh (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Joe Abley (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Tony Rall (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Iljitsch van Beijnum (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Joe Abley (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Iljitsch van Beijnum (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Edward B. Dreger (Dec 29)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Robert E . Seastrom (Dec 30)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU John Kristoff (Dec 30)
- RE: Smallest Transit MTU David Schwartz (Dec 30)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU John Kristoff (Dec 30)
- RE: Smallest Transit MTU David Schwartz (Dec 30)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Robert E . Seastrom (Dec 30)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU John Kristoff (Dec 30)
- Re: Smallest Transit MTU Robert E . Seastrom (Dec 31)