On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello!
>
> > What is the current word on tcp_timestamps and tcp_sack?
>
> No bugs are known to the moment.
Great.
> > Did anyone ever come up with an explanation for this? Is Linux, the remote
> > end, or my firewall (stupid checkpoint fw-1) broken?
>
> Until now all the problems were explained either by bugs in header
> compression or by bugs in firewalls. I do not remember about any essential
> bugs in end-host TCP stacks, counting Linux, certainly.
I suspected that it was a firewall issue.
I've searched the archives but, I can't find any clear answers.
This is hitting me very hard at work, and is delaying the
widespread implimentation of Linux.
Due to great number of sites that appear to be affected, I suspect that
the problem is in our firewall.
The affected Linux boxes are all behind a 'hide' mode NAT checkpoint
firewall (Version 4.0 Build 4066).
I hate the checkpoint device, as it seems to randomly munge packets, but
it's what we have right now, and I don't think I can make a case to
replace it unless I can clearly document it's misbehavior.
If you (or anyone) could point my for some more information, I'd greatly
appreciate it.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
