From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi>
Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2007 12:04:07 +0300

quoted text
> 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 <ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi>

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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html