The logic for determining whether a gap was entirely within a MIME
entity body was not asking the current entity, which may be better able
to answer that question if it was using the Content-Range header and
thus knows if the gap exceeds the length of the body that's still
expected.
Addresses BIT-1247
For example, if we have a connection between TCP "A" and TCP "B" and "A"
sends segments "1" and "2", but we don't see the first and then the next
acknowledgement from "B" is for everything up to, and including, "2",
the gap would be reported to include both segments instead of just the
first and then delivering the second. Put generally: any segments that
weren't yet delivered because they're waiting for an earlier gap to be
filled would be dropped when an ACK comes in that includes the gap as
well as those pending segments. (If a distinct ACK was seen for just
the gap, that situation would have worked).
Addresses BIT-1246.
As opposed to delaying until a certain-sized-buffer fills, which is
problematic because then the event becomes out of sync with the "rest of
the world". E.g. content_gap handlers being called sooner than
expected.
Addresses BIT-1240.
If reading a trace file w/ only TCP control packets, a warning is
emitted to suggest the 'detect_filtered_traces' option if the user
doesn't desire Bro to report missing TCP segments for such a trace file.
