Bill Meier
changed
bug 11624
| What |
Removed |
Added |
| Status |
CONFIRMED
|
IN_PROGRESS
|
Comment # 6
on bug 11624
from Bill Meier
(In reply to Christopher Maynard from comment #3)
> (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.
I agree with the analysis.
I'll dig into the code over the next day or so ....
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.