From owner-freebsd-hackers  Thu Dec 11 04:05:34 1997
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) id EAA07470
          for hackers-outgoing; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 04:05:34 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (root@time.cdrom.com [204.216.27.226])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id EAA07463
          for <freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 04:05:28 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from jkh@time.cdrom.com)
Received: from time.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by time.cdrom.com (8.8.7/8.6.9) with ESMTP id EAA26669; Thu, 11 Dec 1997 04:05:15 -0800 (PST)
To: dg@root.com
cc: Jaye Mathisen <mrcpu@cdsnet.net>,
        Open Systems Networking <opsys@mail.webspan.net>,
        freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: TCP problem 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 11 Dec 1997 02:44:27 PST."
             <199712111044.CAA18888@implode.root.com> 
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 1997 04:05:15 -0800
Message-ID: <26666.881841915@time.cdrom.com>
From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com>
Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>    We didn't? I thought we determined that this was caused by the remote
> machine not getting the ICMP would-fragment messages that your router was
> returning?

I seem to recall that this was one of the theories, but didn't we
collect some trace data right at the end which shot that one down?

						Jordan