ae46ec8e   
   From: rick.jones2@hp.com   
      
   David Schwartz  wrote:   
   > The rules are simple:   
      
   > 1) You can never, ever under any circumstances acknowledge data you   
   > don't actually have.   
      
   > 2) It's desirable to acknowledge all the data you do have.   
      
   > 3) If you can acknowledge more data with a SACK option than without   
   > one, send the SACK option.   
      
   > In practice what that will mean is that any time there's a "hole" in   
   > the received data, a SACK option will be sent so that data on both   
   > sides of the hole can be acknowledged.   
      
   Is it a good idea to call data on the right-hand side of the whole   
   "acknowledged?"  Acknowledged being a somewhat loaded term in   
   TCP-speak.  I'm not sure if there is a pithy replacement for the term   
   to use for the data that is show to be received to the right of the   
   hole(s) in the sequence space - perhaps sacked? (That too has problems   
   I guess :)   
      
   rick jones   
      
   --   
   denial, anger, bargaining, depression, acceptance, rebirth...   
                                        where do you want to be today?   
   these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)   
   feel free to post, OR email to rick.jones2 in hp.com  but NOT BOTH...   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)