On 02.01.2012 10:52, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> On 1/1/12 5:01 AM, Gert Doering wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 08:00:07PM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote:
>>> So tcp isn't generating bad checksums... but tcpdump is seeing corrupt
>>> packets.
>>
>> Hardware with TCP checksum offloadi
On 1/1/12 5:01 AM, Gert Doering wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 08:00:07PM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote:
>> So tcp isn't generating bad checksums... but tcpdump is seeing corrupt
>> packets.
>
> Hardware with TCP checksum offloading is known to cause this effect.
>
> gert
The box i
Hi,
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 08:00:07PM -0700, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> So tcp isn't generating bad checksums... but tcpdump is seeing corrupt
> packets.
Hardware with TCP checksum offloading is known to cause this effect.
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
On 12/31/11 12:31 AM, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> On 12/31/11 12:03 AM, Philip Prindeville wrote:
>> I'm running 2.6.39.4 (svn checkout on or about 29617) and seeing:
>>
>> 23:47:37.749540 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 30955, offset 0, flags [DF], proto
>> TCP (6), length 60)
>> 192.168.1.25.60134 >
On 12/31/11 12:03 AM, Philip Prindeville wrote:
> I'm running 2.6.39.4 (svn checkout on or about 29617) and seeing:
>
> 23:47:37.749540 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 30955, offset 0, flags [DF], proto
> TCP (6), length 60)
> 192.168.1.25.60134 > 192.168.1.253.49152: Flags [S], cksum 0xa8f3
> (corr