Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: can/should SCCP XUDT reassembly be adjusted or finer-grained
From: Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 25 Nov 2013 13:30:30 -0500
On 11/22/13 13:26, Ariel Burbaickij wrote:
Hello all, obviously from several levels ""SCCP XUDT reassembly" does not control reassembly of {X,L}UDT but also of DT1s, shouldn't the corresponding parameter under preferences be adjuster or maybe better yet -- introduce several -- one for {L,X}UDT, another one for DT{1.2}?
I'm not sure why we'd need 2 preferences: it seems unlikely someone would want to reassemble XUDTs but not reassemble DT1s.
But I see your point that the interface is misleading; I updated the preference text (and a bit more) in r53576. That change will show up in the next development version (1.11.3) and the next stable version (1.12.0?).
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-users mailing list <wireshark-users () wireshark org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-users Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-users mailto:wireshark-users-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
Current thread:
- can/should SCCP XUDT reassembly be adjusted or finer-grained Ariel Burbaickij (Nov 22)
- Re: can/should SCCP XUDT reassembly be adjusted or finer-grained Jeff Morriss (Nov 25)
- Re: can/should SCCP XUDT reassembly be adjusted or finer-grained Ariel Burbaickij (Nov 25)
- Re: can/should SCCP XUDT reassembly be adjusted or finer-grained Jeff Morriss (Nov 25)