"Perry E. Metzger" <perry@piermont.com> writes:

> 
> Regardless of which implementation gets selected, however, I would
> like to emphasize, once again, that SACK is really very important,
> especially given the packet drop rates on the current internet.

And your point is?  Nobody has disputed that SACK is a Good Thing.

Someone has promised a complete SACK implementation targeted for
NetBSD by Friday.  There is no reason for us to do anything about it
before then.