From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-Id: <200104242000.WAA00723@piglet.grunz.lu> Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2001 22:00:31 +0200 (CEST) From: Michel Lanners Reply-To: mlan@cpu.lu Subject: Re: Rsync access through NAT? To: geert@linux-m68k.org Cc: ultrapenguin@netscape.net, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: owner-linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org List-Id: Heya, On 24 Apr, this message from Geert Uytterhoeven echoed through cyberspace: > On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, jeramy b smith wrote: >> I'm not sure. The routers are cisco 55xx and 75xx with the latest firmware loaded. Fully Cisco on my end also... 803 as a NAT access-router at home, and 36xx devices from there on. > From there it hits the SprintLink and Abovenet clouds. I wish there was a tool that could do an point to point traceroute like journey and stop when it hits a hop that doesn't support ECN. Or does traceroute do this when used with 2.4 and ECN support on? > > I think it does. No idea here... I'm new to ECN; I did some lookups at work today but didn't have time to finish reading on it.... >> mlan@cpu.lu wrote: >> > Yup, that seems to be the problem. rsync works again for me on >> > penguinppc. So I guess that some device close to penguinppc.org doesn't >> > support ECN..... > > Then why can I ping penguinppc.org without problems? Because my AXP firewall > still runs 2.2.x? Maybe because the NAT function on my Cisco 803 is to blame? Cisco might 'accidentaly' support it in normal packet forwarding, but might not when doing NAT, since the IP header may need to be rewritten-- probably without the ECN bits. Cheers Michel ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michel Lanners | " Read Philosophy. Study Art. 23, Rue Paul Henkes | Ask Questions. Make Mistakes. L-1710 Luxembourg | email mlan@cpu.lu | http://www.cpu.lu/~mlan | Learn Always. " ** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/