I simply crontab an ECN off period for five minutes every hour and flush
the mail queue.
David.
Holger Lubitz wrote:
>"H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
>
>>I suspect that the main way to get this thing fixed is to make sure
>>ECN is enabled on the server side; for example, we have turned on ECN
>>on
I simply crontab an ECN off period for five minutes every hour and flush
the mail queue.
David.
Holger Lubitz wrote:
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
I suspect that the main way to get this thing fixed is to make sure
ECN is enabled on the server side; for example, we have turned on ECN
on kernel.org.
> I suspect that the main way to get this thing fixed is to make sure
> ECN is enabled on the server side; for example, we have turned on ECN
> on kernel.org. If a user is using a broken software stack, it's their
> loss, not ours.
I agree it's the server side that will eventuelly push it
"H. Peter Anvin" wrote:
> I suspect that the main way to get this thing fixed is to make sure
> ECN is enabled on the server side; for example, we have turned on ECN
> on kernel.org. If a user is using a broken software stack, it's their
> loss, not ours.
This is what we do here, too. The only
I suspect that the main way to get this thing fixed is to make sure
ECN is enabled on the server side; for example, we have turned on ECN
on kernel.org. If a user is using a broken software stack, it's their
loss, not ours.
I agree it's the server side that will eventuelly push it through,
H. Peter Anvin wrote:
I suspect that the main way to get this thing fixed is to make sure
ECN is enabled on the server side; for example, we have turned on ECN
on kernel.org. If a user is using a broken software stack, it's their
loss, not ours.
This is what we do here, too. The only
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 01:08:31PM -0400, God wrote:
> > On Wed, 9 May 2001, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> >
> > > 2) They certainly are. Every once in a while they go through a period of
> > >silently dropping all email coming from hosts that don't
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 01:08:31PM -0400, God wrote:
> On Wed, 9 May 2001, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
> > 2) They certainly are. Every once in a while they go through a period of
> >silently dropping all email coming from hosts that don't have PTRs.
> >This would be no worse.
>
> ACK
Followup to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
By author:God <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Agreed. For now ECN has been disabled here. I got tired of so many sites
> not supporting it that I gave up. Maybe by 2.8.x kernels it will be worth
> turning back on. Thats not to say
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> 2) They certainly are. Every once in a while they go through a period of
>silently dropping all email coming from hosts that don't have PTRs.
>This would be no worse.
ACK Which do you mean? :
-Hosts that don't have valid PTRs (which
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Pekka Savola wrote:
> To: Matthew Geier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> On Wed, 9 May 2001, Matthew Geier wrote:
> > > Help is needed to contact these site owners and politely using a standard
> > > email ask them that their site was non-conformant.
[snip]
> >
> >
> > I tried to
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 10:10:29AM -0400, Horst von Brand wrote:
> Gregory Maxwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> [...]
>
> > Anyone have any friends at AOL? I wonder what the effect on these
> > non-conformant sites would be if AOL's proxy's became ECN enabled?
>
> And AOL is sure crazy enough
Gregory Maxwell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> Anyone have any friends at AOL? I wonder what the effect on these
> non-conformant sites would be if AOL's proxy's became ECN enabled?
And AOL is sure crazy enough to "break compatibility with everybody" just
out of courtesy to someone's friend
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 10:31:23PM -0400, jamal wrote:
> Folks,
>
> ECN is about to become a Proposed Standard RFC. Thanks to
> efforts from the Linux community, a few issues were discovered
> in the course of deploying the code. Special kudos go to Alexey
> Kuznetsov and David Miller.
[snip]
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Matthew Geier wrote:
> > This is to solicit volunteers who will help removing the remaining cruft.
> > Some vendors (special positive mention goes to CISCO) have released
> > patches which are unfortunately not being propagated by some of the
> > site owners.
> > Help is
> This is to solicit volunteers who will help removing the remaining cruft.
> Some vendors (special positive mention goes to CISCO) have released
> patches which are unfortunately not being propagated by some of the
> site owners.
> Help is needed to contact these site owners and politely using a
Gregory Maxwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
[...]
Anyone have any friends at AOL? I wonder what the effect on these
non-conformant sites would be if AOL's proxy's became ECN enabled?
And AOL is sure crazy enough to break compatibility with everybody just
out of courtesy to someone's friend call.
This is to solicit volunteers who will help removing the remaining cruft.
Some vendors (special positive mention goes to CISCO) have released
patches which are unfortunately not being propagated by some of the
site owners.
Help is needed to contact these site owners and politely using a
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Pekka Savola wrote:
To: Matthew Geier [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Matthew Geier wrote:
Help is needed to contact these site owners and politely using a standard
email ask them that their site was non-conformant.
[snip]
I tried to get my local
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Matthew Geier wrote:
This is to solicit volunteers who will help removing the remaining cruft.
Some vendors (special positive mention goes to CISCO) have released
patches which are unfortunately not being propagated by some of the
site owners.
Help is needed to
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
2) They certainly are. Every once in a while they go through a period of
silently dropping all email coming from hosts that don't have PTRs.
This would be no worse.
ACK Which do you mean? :
-Hosts that don't have valid PTRs (which would
On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 10:31:23PM -0400, jamal wrote:
Folks,
ECN is about to become a Proposed Standard RFC. Thanks to
efforts from the Linux community, a few issues were discovered
in the course of deploying the code. Special kudos go to Alexey
Kuznetsov and David Miller.
[snip]
Anyone
Followup to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
By author:God [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
Agreed. For now ECN has been disabled here. I got tired of so many sites
not supporting it that I gave up. Maybe by 2.8.x kernels it will be worth
turning back on. Thats not to say however
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 01:08:31PM -0400, God wrote:
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
2) They certainly are. Every once in a while they go through a period of
silently dropping all email coming from hosts that don't have PTRs.
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 01:08:31PM -0400, God wrote:
On Wed, 9 May 2001, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
2) They certainly are. Every once in a while they go through a period of
silently dropping all email coming from hosts that don't have PTRs.
This would be no worse.
ACK Which do
On Wed, May 09, 2001 at 10:10:29AM -0400, Horst von Brand wrote:
Gregory Maxwell [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
[...]
Anyone have any friends at AOL? I wonder what the effect on these
non-conformant sites would be if AOL's proxy's became ECN enabled?
And AOL is sure crazy enough to break
> This was the big argument I was running into from sites, "well it
> isn't standard yet, when it is we'll do something about it". The
> larger sites like to avoid updates until absolutely necessary.
Good grief - nothing like planning ahead ... and these large-site
administrators actually
On Tue, 8 May 2001, jamal wrote:
> Any one wishing to volunteer, please still send your emails in --
> we should be ready in a few days from now,
>
I guess i should have mentioned the IESG is sitting in to approve ECN
as proposed standard in about a week or so.
cheers,
jamal
-
To unsubscribe
On Tue, 8 May 2001, David S. Miller wrote:
>
> I believe it would only be prudent to actually send out these messages
> starting at the moment ECN is officially standard.
>
> This was the big argument I was running into from sites, "well it
> isn't standard yet, when it is we'll do something
jamal writes:
> Help is needed to contact these site owners and politely using a standard
> email ask them that their site was non-conformant.
> Point them to Sally's draft and the fact that ECN is becoming standard
> in the next week or so. Also to Jeff's ECN-under-Linux Unofficial
>
This was the big argument I was running into from sites, well it
isn't standard yet, when it is we'll do something about it. The
larger sites like to avoid updates until absolutely necessary.
Good grief - nothing like planning ahead ... and these large-site
administrators actually accept
On Tue, 8 May 2001, jamal wrote:
Any one wishing to volunteer, please still send your emails in --
we should be ready in a few days from now,
I guess i should have mentioned the IESG is sitting in to approve ECN
as proposed standard in about a week or so.
cheers,
jamal
-
To unsubscribe
jamal writes:
Help is needed to contact these site owners and politely using a standard
email ask them that their site was non-conformant.
Point them to Sally's draft and the fact that ECN is becoming standard
in the next week or so. Also to Jeff's ECN-under-Linux Unofficial
Vendor
On Tue, 8 May 2001, David S. Miller wrote:
I believe it would only be prudent to actually send out these messages
starting at the moment ECN is officially standard.
This was the big argument I was running into from sites, well it
isn't standard yet, when it is we'll do something about
34 matches
Mail list logo
