The last 3 options are dangerous; although i am pretty sure it is too
late to complain about it since you have released the code at least once.
When ECN nonces comes into effect, it may become a non-issue (but would
still make interesting effect).
suggestion: get rid of them.
cheers,
jamal
On Tue, 6 Aug 2002, Harald Welte wrote:
>
> There is one question left: How much flexibility do we want to give the user?
>
> The ECN target currently allows:
>
> --ecn-tcp-remove Remove CWR+ECE bits from TCP header. Should be used
> on TCP syn packets to prevent ECN negotiation
>
> --ecn-ip-ect [0..3] Allows arbitrary setting of the ECT codepoint
> --ecn-tcp-cwr [0|1] Allows setting or clearing the TCP CWR bit
> --ecn-tcp-ece [0|1] Allows setting or clearing the TCP ECE bit
>
>
> The first option is necessarry and is the primary use of the target.
> The last three options are more experimental and would allow somebody
> to play with 'simulated congestion' by setting the ECT in IP, etc.
>
> However, this is potentially very dangerous and I'm not sure if it was
> a good idea to give this power directly to the user.
>
> Do you suggest removing the last three options and just keep the
> --ecn-tcp-remove ?
>
> Thanks for your assistance,
>
> --
> Live long and prosper
> - Harald Welte / laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.gnumonks.org/
> ============================================================================
> GCS/E/IT d- s-: a-- C+++ UL++++$ P+++ L++++$ E--- W- N++ o? K- w--- O- M+
> V-- PS++ PE-- Y++ PGP++ t+ 5-- !X !R tv-- b+++ !DI !D G+ e* h--- r++ y+(*)
>
|