Re: IP More Fragements bit problem.

netdev

Re: IP More Fragements bit problem.

To:	Nivedita Singhvi <niv@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: IP More Fragements bit problem.
From:	Vincent Roqueta <vincent.roqueta@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:	Mon, 14 Feb 2005 13:37:25 +0100
Cc:	netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<200502140929.24379.vincent.roqueta@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Organization:	BULL SA
References:	<200502111708.16024.vincent.roqueta@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <420CFD1F.2060701@xxxxxxxxxx> <200502140929.24379.vincent.roqueta@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender:	netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent:	KMail/1.6.1

Hello,
> >
> > Silly question, but are you absolutely sure that the original wasn't
> > actually ABCDE?
>
> No, we are not sure. It is possible we lack the last fragement witch is not
> marked with the MF bit.

You are right. All fragments are not sent !!! And so the last fragment 
received is not the last fragment sent by the client. The MF is set and that 
is correct.

Sorry :/


Vincent

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
IP More Fragements bit problem., Vincent Roqueta Re: IP More Fragements bit problem., Andi Kleen Re: IP More Fragements bit problem., Vincent Roqueta Re: IP More Fragements bit problem., Nivedita Singhvi Re: IP More Fragements bit problem., Vincent Roqueta Re: IP More Fragements bit problem., Vincent Roqueta <=

Previous by Date:	[PATCH] VLAN over bonding, Olaf Kirch
Next by Date:	Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/3] netlink check sender, Stephen Smalley
Previous by Thread:	Re: IP More Fragements bit problem., Vincent Roqueta
Next by Thread:	[PATCH] tg3: capacitive coupling detection fix, Michael Chan
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]