Graham Murray wrote:
>>echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_window_scaling
>>fixes it.
> But is not really satisfactory. If everyone just stops using the
[snip]
> What is needed is some way of
> identifying the equipment which is causing the problem and getting the
> admins to fix their equipment so as to be RFC compliant.
If it costs an admin $$, then it's not going to be fixed. If it were
otherwise, then admins wouldn't allow spoofed packets to run through to
the outside of their network. I personally have it turned on now. I like
the feature, and I don't need to access the broken site (router)
referred to in the parent.
However, if my ability to get more $$ relied on a broken site (router),
then I definitely would turn it back off.
Companies aren't really concerned with RFC compliance unless it costs
them something: employees, penalty fees, larger vendor prices, hits to
the web site, support staff costs. Otherwise - money.
If you can get 80% of the web to use Linux kernels with tcp window
scaling turned on, then I'm positive you'll be able to get those admins
to get RFC compliant.
The same thing could be said for being (HTML 4.0 | strict | traditional
| XHTML) compliant. IE allows [web]admins to be lazy. They have no
incentive to be otherwise.
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>>echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_window_scaling
>>fixes it.
> But is not really satisfactory. If everyone just stops using the
[snip]
> What is needed is some way of
> identifying the equipment which is causing the problem and getting the
> admins to fix their equipment so as to be RFC compliant.
If it costs an admin $$, then it's not going to be fixed. If it were
otherwise, then admins wouldn't allow spoofed packets to run through to
the outside of their network. I personally have it turned on now. I like
the feature, and I don't need to access the broken site (router)
referred to in the parent.
However, if my ability to get more $$ relied on a broken site (router),
then I definitely would turn it back off.
Companies aren't really concerned with RFC compliance unless it costs
them something: employees, penalty fees, larger vendor prices, hits to
the web site, support staff costs. Otherwise - money.
If you can get 80% of the web to use Linux kernels with tcp window
scaling turned on, then I'm positive you'll be able to get those admins
to get RFC compliant.
The same thing could be said for being (HTML 4.0 | strict | traditional
| XHTML) compliant. IE allows [web]admins to be lazy. They have no
incentive to be otherwise.
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list