Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Was change to ip_push_pending_frames intended to break udp (more specifically, WCCP?) | From | Vlad Yasevich <> | Date | Mon, 22 May 2006 17:10:15 -0400 |
| |
On Tue, 2006-05-23 at 00:21 +0400, Paul P Komkoff Jr wrote: > Replying to Vlad Yasevich: > > /* This is only to work around buggy Windows95/2000 > > * VJ compression implementations. If the ID field > > * does not change, they drop every other packet in > > * a TCP stream using header compression. > > */ > > Unfortunately, cisco IOS also complains that packets are "duplicate". > And, regarding to your previous message on how to fix this - IIRC, if > I do connect() on this socket, it will refuse to receive datagrams > from hosts other than specified in connect(), and I will be unable to > bind another socket to the same port on my side. > > That said, the only solution which is close to what been before, will > be to keep one socket for receive, and create socket for each router I > am communicating with, right?
Yewwww... I see you problem.
To me this sounds like a bug in IOS. I hope someone else would comment.
I did previously search a bunch of RFC and nowhere did a find a requirement that IDs should be non-zero when DF bit is set. The only time IP IDs are mentioned is in the fragmentation and reassembly description.
-vlad
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |