[TCP]: Update references in two old comments

This updates references to drafts in comments which must be about 10
years old.  Internet draft draft-ietf-tcpimpl-prob-03.txt expired in 1998
and was replaced by RFC 2525 in March 1999.

Section 3.10 of the draft maps almost identically into section 2.17 of RFC
2525: both are entitled "Failure to RST on close with data pending", the
differences in text body amount to a typo and minor sentence change.

Signed-off-by: Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

1 files changed, 6 insertions, 8 deletions

diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp.c b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
index 2cf9a898ce5..d6e48866817 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp.c
@@ -1573,14 +1573,12 @@ void tcp_close(struct sock *sk, long timeout)
 
 	sk_stream_mem_reclaim(sk);
 
-	/* As outlined in draft-ietf-tcpimpl-prob-03.txt, section
-	 * 3.10, we send a RST here because data was lost.  To
-	 * witness the awful effects of the old behavior of always
-	 * doing a FIN, run an older 2.1.x kernel or 2.0.x, start
-	 * a bulk GET in an FTP client, suspend the process, wait
-	 * for the client to advertise a zero window, then kill -9
-	 * the FTP client, wheee...  Note: timeout is always zero
-	 * in such a case.
+	/* As outlined in RFC 2525, section 2.17, we send a RST here because
+	 * data was lost. To witness the awful effects of the old behavior of
+	 * always doing a FIN, run an older 2.1.x kernel or 2.0.x, start a bulk
+	 * GET in an FTP client, suspend the process, wait for the client to
+	 * advertise a zero window, then kill -9 the FTP client, wheee...
+	 * Note: timeout is always zero in such a case.
 	 */
 	if (data_was_unread) {
 		/* Unread data was tossed, zap the connection. */