On Mon, Nov 06, 2000 at 11:27:54PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote: > What 2.4.x is doing is completely legal. Really, even if not all of > these people are from Earthlink (well, you should see if this is for > certain) they may all be using the same buggy terminal server at these > different ISPs. I think such a theory would at least need verifying (e.g. by a sniffer on the windows end that checks checksums or someone finding the checksum failed counters windows probably maintains) -Andi - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> Win98 SE... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> Win9... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> ... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-&... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 &... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Andi Kleen
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Andi Kleen
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Rogier Wolff
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 &... Andi Kleen
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... Andi Kleen
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-... David S. Miller
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> ... Rogier Wolff
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> Win98 SE PPP Jordan Mendelson
- Re: Poor TCP Performance 2.4.0-10 <-> Win98 SE... David S. Miller