RFC 4774: Specifying Alternate Semantics for the Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Field
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
There have been a number of proposals for alternate semantics for the Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) field in the IP header RFC 3168. This document discusses some of the issues in defining alternate semantics for the ECN field, and specifies requirements for a safe coexistence in an Internet that could include routers that do not understand the defined alternate semantics. This document evolved as a result of discussions with the authors of one recent proposal for such alternate semantics. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC4774
- Published
- November 2006
- Authors
- S. Floyd
- Status
- BEST CURRENT PRACTICE
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- wit
- Pages
- 15
- Also known as
- BCP124
- Updated by:
- RFC 6040
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 4782Quick-Start for TCP and IPCurrent
January 2007
- RFC 4804Aggregation of Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) Reservations over MPLS TE/DS-TE TunnelsCurrent
February 2007
- RFC 4820Padding Chunk and Parameter for the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)Current
March 2007
- RFC 4860Generic Aggregate Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) ReservationsCurrent
May 2007
- RFC 4653Improving the Robustness of TCP to Non-Congestion EventsCurrent
August 2006
- RFC 4895Authenticated Chunks for the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP)Current
August 2007
- RFC 4898TCP Extended Statistics MIBCurrent
May 2007
- RFC 4923Quality of Service (QoS) Signaling in a Nested Virtual Private NetworkCurrent
August 2007
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?