[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 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <[email protected]>

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. */

net/ipv4/tcp_output.c

@@ -2035,7 +2035,7 @@ void tcp_send_fin(struct sock *sk)
 /* We get here when a process closes a file descriptor (either due to
  * an explicit close() or as a byproduct of exit()'ing) and there
  * was unread data in the receive queue.  This behavior is recommended
- * by draft-ietf-tcpimpl-prob-03.txt section 3.10.  -DaveM
+ * by RFC 2525, section 2.17.  -DaveM
  */
 void tcp_send_active_reset(struct sock *sk, gfp_t priority)
 {