One of this router leads to the ISOC web site. what is funny is to see
the
above RFC is copyright ISOC. Could someone located in the Washington
DC area
please contact the ISOC people and help them to be RFC compliant...
Your reference to "RFC compliance" is somewhat mistaken. First, it
misrepresents what RFC compliance means: the FOO explains how to do FOO;
a system is compliant if it chooses to do FOO in a manner compatible
with the RFC, and non compliant if it chooses an incompatible variant;
however, a system that does not do FOO is neither compliant nor
non-compliant, it just does not do it. There is absolutely no IETF
mandate that all systems implement all RFC.
Second, RFC 3168 is a "Proposed Standard". To quote RFC 2026:
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.
So, if you are on a campaign to promote ECN, then maybe you should first
try to promote this specification to the next standard level... You may
also want to take a stab at revising the "Requirements for IP Version 4
Routers"; the last edition, RFC 1812 by Fred Baker, dates from June
1995.
-- Christian Huitema