tcpdump mailing list archives
Re: Re: [design] test failures in HEAD
From: Bill Fenner <fenner () research att com>
Date: Wed, 1 Oct 2003 09:00:50 -0700
Actually, another option is to just ditch compatability for the original pflog header. Here's my thinking: pflog is (has been) only on OpenBSD, and their native tcpdump didn't translate the DLT, so the only dump files that exist have the old header as 17 and the new header as 117. [this assumption is negated for anyone who used tcpdump.org's tcpdump on OpenBSD]. If we just pretend that 117 was what was assigned to the new header, we can save a lot of backwards compatability cruft by just saying that our tcpdump/libpcap simply doesn't support the old header. So, what I guess we need to decide is what's the probability of people having old dumps that were written by tcpdump.org's tcpdump? We won't be able to decode the old dumps written by OpenBSD's tcpdump either way. I think that we'd be better off with no backwards compatability and using 117 for the new pflog. It's a lot of cruft for something that the OS vendor themselves don't support any more. It's nice to say that we will never invalidate any dump files, but it seems like a very small probability that there will be any such dump files . . . Bill - This is the TCPDUMP workers list. It is archived at http://www.tcpdump.org/lists/workers/index.html To unsubscribe use mailto:tcpdump-workers-request () tcpdump org?body=unsubscribe
Current thread:
- Re: [design] test failures in HEAD Bill Fenner (Sep 30)
- Re: [design] test failures in HEAD Michael Richardson (Sep 30)
- <Possible follow-ups>
- Re: [design] test failures in HEAD Bill Fenner (Sep 30)
- Re: [design] test failures in HEAD Bill Fenner (Sep 30)
- Re: Re: [design] test failures in HEAD Guy Harris (Sep 30)
- Re: Re: [design] test failures in HEAD Bill Fenner (Oct 01)
- Re: [design] test failures in HEAD Michael Richardson (Oct 01)
- Re: Re: [design] test failures in HEAD Guy Harris (Sep 30)