Packet format: simple efficiency improvements

This is pull request represents my first step in an attempt to make fred more resource-efficient on the network and packet level. Changes (apart from some minor readability improvements):

### PacketThrottle
* add method to report multiple lost packets, so we can call that instead of
  iterating over `notifyOfPacketLost(…)`

### NewPacketFormatKeyContext
* reduce the operations inside a `synchronized(){}` block to a bare minimum
* only keep track of the sent times of *lost* packets: if a packet is not lost,
  we still have a SentPacket that keeps track of its own sent time (this also
  reduces the amount of work in ack() for the most common code path)
* reduce bounds on packets to track sent time of from 16384 to 128 (we don't
  expect that many *lost* packets on short notice, and if we do, not having a
  super-accurate RTT estimate is the least of our problems)
* improve `ack(…)` CPU efficiency by using `SentTimeCache` instead of `SentTimes`
  (we're no longer concerned about memory given the above, so optimize for
  speed)
* use `for(item : collection)` wherever applicable for readability

### SentTimeCache
* this class replaces `SentTimes`
* uses a `LinkedHashMap` with O(1) lookup instead of a linear search
* uses more memory than `SentTimes` did, but we shouldn't care anymore

### SentTimes
* removed since it's highly inefficient by design and is no longer used
> Also, this verifies that LinkedHashMap works as advertised which is slightly out of focus for Fred.

This is true only up to a certain point. More specifically, this `assert` asserts that my implementation of `removeEldestEntry` in this subclass of `LinkedHashMap` is functioning as intended. Assertions are not enabled by default on user boxes, and even if they are, the overhead of this assertion is neglegible.

Apart from the actual "testing" performed by having this assertion, it serves another purpose: it states an important invariant that does not logically arise from the use of `put`. If you require so, I am sure willing to replace this assertion with a comment providing the same information.