Comment # 3
on bug 11624
from Christopher Maynard
(In reply to tferguson from comment #2)
> However, #48 is acking for 12725 (up to, but not including, 12725) which is
> seen in #47. seq 11456 with 1269 data. Can you explain this please?
Yes, this seems wrong to me. I don't think Wireshark should be indicating "TCP
ACKed unseen segment" here because clearly that segment is present in Frame 47.
But Frame 49 *should* be indicating "TCP ACKed unseen segment" as that's an ACK
for a segment not captured somewhere between Frames 27 and 29.
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.