Hi, I still think 2/3 is a legitimate fix. To clarify, I was not trying to claim that 84 is some magic number in the abstract, and I agree the packetdrill is artificial.
My point was only that, in the constructed case, the old code can preserve a scaled window that is larger than the currently backed receive space, while 2/3 keeps the stored window representable in scaled units. That said, I am probably missing the reason why that is not a problem according to the feedback you all have given. So I am going to drop it here. To be clear this has nothing to do with social engineering, just was trying to fix something that doesn't need fixed I suppose. Thanks, Wesley Atwell
