Re: A puzzled maintainer with questions regarding

[Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>]

On Feb 4, 2011, at 12:25 AM, M.Baris Demiray wrote:

> In fact this is not what STANAG 5066 Annex H "Implementation Guide and
> Notes" section suggests. According to this section and the tests held
> by DRA (Defence Research Agency),
>
> 1) The throughput is not strongly sensitive to frame size
> 2) 200 bytes is a good 'compromise' selection for frame size
>
> Besides, STANAG 5066 has the ability of doing DRC (Data Rate Change)
> in accordance with SNR values so what is suggested by that white
> paper, I think, is not applicable.

That's somewhat of an implementation detail that shouldn't affect code that tries to dissect those packets.

> Precisely. Yet may be a little clarification is needed. You might have
> noticed that in my first e-mail I mentioned about DTS (Data Transfer
> Sublayer) and that one of our dissector methods has the name
> dissect_s5066dts() but now we are talking about MAC layer and all this
> may look like a confusion but it is not. As explained in Isode white
> paper there are three versions of STANAG 5066. MAC (Medium Access
> Control) layer was introduced in Edition 2 (which was later renamed as
> Edition 3) and designated to manage HF modem interface that DTS was
> designated to do the same before.

So is there a publicly-available specification that documents what the packets using this link-layer type look like?-
This is the tcpdump-workers list.
Visit https://cod.sandelman.ca/ to unsubscribe.