On Tue, 2010-03-02 at 11:15 +0100, Simon Goldschmidt wrote: > > That's probably just a wrong printf-modifier (%d?) that interprets the > seqno as signed value. I guess in the case of the log, the seqno was > >= 0x80000000.
Given the other messages in the log though I wouldn't expect the sequence number to jump that much between packets. Kieran _______________________________________________ lwip-users mailing list lwip-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lwip-users
