[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200811071707.02030.remi.denis-courmont@nokia.com>
Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2008 17:07:01 +0200
From: "Rémi Denis-Courmont"
<remi.denis-courmont@...ia.com>
To: "ext David Newall" <davidn@...idnewall.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Dave Hudson <linux-kernel@...eteddy.net>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>,
Mikael Abrahamsson <swmike@....pp.se>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, daniel.blueman@...il.com,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-net@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: time for TCP ECN defaulting to on?
On Friday 07 November 2008 16:45:55 ext David Newall, you wrote:
> Isn't this a question for the IETF to answer? Are they saying turn on
> ECN now?
For what it's worth, the IESG says RFC3168 is a PROPOSED STANDARD.
This is the "entry-level maturity for the standards track":
(ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/bcp/bcp9.txt)
A Proposed Standard specification is generally stable, has resolved
known design choices, is believed to be well-understood, has received
significant community review, and appears to enjoy enough community
interest to be considered valuable. However, further experience
might result in a change or even retraction of the specification
before it advances.
(...)
Implementors should treat Proposed Standards as immature
specifications. It is desirable to implement them in order to gain
experience and to validate, test, and clarify the specification.
However, since the content of Proposed Standards may be changed if
problems are found or better solutions are identified, deploying
implementations of such standards into a disruption-sensitive
environment is not recommended.
--
Rémi Denis-Courmont
Maemo Software, Nokia Devices R&D
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists