Bill Crawford wrote:
> In connection with connection failures using recent kernels, it often
> seems to be related to ECN being enabled.
>
> PIX firewalls seem to interpret the ECN option header as a source
> route header (that's what it's logged as).
>
> I got bitten by this at work ;·(
Cisc
In connection with connection failures using recent kernels, it often
seems to be related to ECN being enabled.
PIX firewalls seem to interpret the ECN option header as a source
route header (that's what it's logged as).
I got bitten by this at work ;·(
--
/* Bill Crawford, Unix Systems Dev
Try this shot in the dark:
echo "0" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn
jjs
snpe wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have got 2 Linux machine with kernel 2.4.0 i kernel 2.2.18.
> I am in Belgrade , Yugoslavia and I can't access to any hosts :
>
> for example, www.linux.co.yu (Island), www.skyrr.is, www.hotmail.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Access is ok with kernel 2.2 even in a case when machine with 2.4
> kernel is masquerading host. It doesn't work with any port. Ping
> works.
Read the FAQ again. More carefully this time. Pay close attention to
section 14.2
http://www.tux.org/lkml/
--
dwmw2
-
To
hi
have you tried
echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_ecn ?
for some reason PIX firewalls act strangely when explicit congestion
notification is used...
hope this helps..
david F.
On Wed, 17 Jan 2001, snpe wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I have got 2 Linux machine with kernel 2.4.0 i kernel 2.2.18.
> I
Hello,
I have got 2 Linux machine with kernel 2.4.0 i kernel 2.2.18.
I am in Belgrade , Yugoslavia and I can't access to any hosts :
for example, www.linux.co.yu (Island), www.skyrr.is, www.hotmail.com etc
Access is ok with kernel 2.2 even in a case when machine with 2.4 kernel is
masquerading
6 matches
Mail list logo
