Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 16:27:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 16:27:21 -0500 Received: from rwcrmhc53.attbi.com ([204.127.198.39]:18821 "EHLO rwcrmhc53.attbi.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 21 Feb 2003 16:27:18 -0500 From: jordan.breeding@attbi.com To: John Bradford Cc: warp@mercury.d2dc.net (Zephaniah E. Hull), Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC3168, section 6.1.1.1 - ECN and retransmit of SYN Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 21:37:20 +0000 X-Mailer: AT&T Message Center Version 1 (Nov 5 2002) X-Authenticated-Sender: am9yZGFuLmJyZWVkaW5nQGF0dGJpLmNvbQ== Message-Id: <20030221212718Z267732-29901+771@vger.kernel.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1780 Lines: 37 > > As far as I can see, though, implementing this gains less than we > stand to loose. > > What if the first SYN packet, or the response to it is lost, (which is > more possible on congested links, which is when ECN would be most > useful), and we disable ECN - then we loose out on functionality we > could have, and the work around is actually detremental to > performance. Once 99% of internet hosts support ECN, we could be > loosing more than we gain. > > If a site is unreachable, ECN can be disabled, and the RFC violating > equipment is easily identified. Automatically disabling ECN just > hides the problem from the user, who might then not be benefiting from > ECN, and will quite possibly accept the degraded performance as > normal. > > John. > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ I think they may have been talking about disabling ECN capabilities for the packets which never got responded to, what is the loss if 1% of your overall traffic has to be re-transmitted to work but the other 99% just works and you never have to turn ECN off with the sysctl at all? I think they might have been going for something like this: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=102926352817528&w=2 which was brought on by this: http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=102919814321938&w=2 Jordan - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/