Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: Incorrect decoding at first time, then filtering at the second time corrects the decoding
From: Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>
Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2010 10:13:55 -0800
On Dec 8, 2010, at 9:22 AM, Andreas wrote:
Am 08.12.2010 17:14, schrieb Stephen Fisher:On Wed, Dec 08, 2010 at 12:29:40PM +0530, Vishal Kumar Singh wrote: The best solution is to keep track of the information from previous packets only on the first pass and store the data on a per-conversation and per-packet basis.I know already the conversion-data. But what is the intension of the per-packet data? Usually I have the raw data available with the tvb.
The raw data might not be fully dissectable without some further information. For example, in an SMTP connection, some packets going from the client to the server contain commands and some contain mail-message data; Wireshark dissects them differently, and it has to attach to a given packet an indication of whether it contains commands or mail-message data. In addition, to handle STARTTLS, it *also* has to indicate whether the packet contains TLS-encapsulated SMTP, rather than unencapsulated commands or mail-message data. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
Current thread:
- Incorrect decoding at first time, then filtering at the second time corrects the decoding Vishal Kumar Singh (Dec 07)
- Re: Incorrect decoding at first time, then filtering at the second time corrects the decoding Stephen Fisher (Dec 08)
- Re: Incorrect decoding at first time, then filtering at the second time corrects the decoding Andreas (Dec 08)
- Re: Incorrect decoding at first time, then filtering at the second time corrects the decoding Guy Harris (Dec 08)
- Re: Incorrect decoding at first time, then filtering at the second time corrects the decoding Andreas (Dec 08)
- Re: Incorrect decoding at first time, then filtering at the second time corrects the decoding Christopher Maynard (Dec 08)
- Re: Incorrect decoding at first time, then filtering at the second time corrects the decoding Stephen Fisher (Dec 08)