Hello! > Well, take a look at the double acks for 84439343, 84440447 and 84441059, > they seem pretty much identical to me. It is just a little tcpdump glitch. 19:34:54.532271 < 10.2.20.246.33060 > 65.171.224.182.8700: . 44:44(0) ack 84439343 win 24544 <nop,nop,timestamp 226080638 99717832> (DF) (ttl 64, id 60946) 19:34:54.532432 < 10.2.20.246.33060 > 65.171.224.182.8700: . 44:44(0) ack 84439343 win 24544 <nop,nop,timestamp 226080638 99717832> (DF) (ttl 64, id 60946) It is one ACK (look at IP ID), shown twice. This happens sometimes with our packet socket. > >I still do not know how the value of 184 is possible in your case, > >I would expect 730 as an absolute possible minumum. I see 9420 (2355*4). > > The numbers I mentioned are straight from the tcpdump and are not scaled, I understood. I expect when 184*4, when you said 184. But minimum is still 730 (unscaled 1460*2). If you really saw values lower than 730 (unscaled 1460*2), there is another more severe problem and the suggested patch will not solve it. Alexey - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html