From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:04:07 +0300
> In case of ACK reordering, the SACK block might be valid in it's > time but is already obsoleted since we've received another kind > of confirmation about arrival of the segments through snd_una > advancement of an earlier packet. > > I didn't bother to build distinguishing of valid and invalid > SACK blocks but simply made reordered SACK blocks that are too > old always not counted regardless of their "real" validity which > could be determined by using the ack field of the reordered > packet (won't be significant IMHO). > > DSACKs can very well be considered useful even in this situation, > so won't do any of this for them. > > Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> This looks fine to me, applied. If the skipped case is interesting we can add another MIB stat for it :-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
