From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:31:07 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:30:57 -0500 Received: from Cantor.suse.de ([194.112.123.193]:42507 "HELO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Sun, 12 Nov 2000 08:30:49 -0500 Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2000 14:30:47 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: "David S. Miller" Cc: ecki@lina.inka.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Missing ACKs with Linux 2.2/2.4? Message-ID: <20001112143047.A9227@gruyere.muc.suse.de> In-Reply-To: <200011112227.OAA02548@pizda.ninka.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <200011112227.OAA02548@pizda.ninka.net>; from davem@redhat.com on Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 02:27:13PM -0800 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Nov 11, 2000 at 02:27:13PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Bernd Eckenfels > Date: Sat, 11 Nov 2000 20:26:49 +0100 > > Or is timestamp 0 a legal value? > > It is legal. NetBSD ignores 0 timestamps. Although that's a hack it is IMHO a reasonable one and Linux should probably do it too. Even when the 0 is generated legitimately by wrapping counters it is probably not a big problem to lose timestamps for such few packets. -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/