Sequence number validity

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Subject: Sequence number validity
From: <vladimir.moltchanov@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 16:04:42 +0200
Thread-index: AcdHnEChaA3LcSi1SGGjEWAlxppNhg==
Thread-topic: Sequence number validity

Title: Sequence number validity

Hi all,

In section 7.5.3 of the RFC4340 (Sequence-Validity rules) and in pseudocode as well (rfc4340, page 96) the following sequence numbers test is used to make lenient checks for Sync and SyncAck:

SWL <= seqno

Is it so, that with 48-bit limited sequence numbers that are wrapping around, this test would always be "true"?

B.R.
Vladimir.

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Sequence number validity
  - From: Eddie Kohler

Prev by Date: Re: Separate header checksums and WiFi
Next by Date: Re: Sequence number validity
Previous by thread: Separate header checksums and WiFi
Next by thread: Re: Sequence number validity
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Linux Kernel Development] [Linux DCCP] [IETF Annouce] [Linux Networking] [Git] [Security] [Linux Assembly] [Bugtraq] [Yosemite] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Linux SCSI] [DDR & Rambus]

Powered by Linux