Re: How to avoid dissection based on port defined by a different dissector?

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

On Dec 15, 2010, at 8:26 PM, Chris Maynard wrote:

> Guy Harris <guy@...> writes:
>
> > SHOULD in some RFC - or even a MUST - but I don't know offhand what RFC that is)
>
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2119

Sorry, I didn't make it clear that "what RFC that is" is "what RFC - if any - says that ephemeral ports should be 
handed out by default", not "what RFC explains what SHOULD and MUST mean".  *Is* there an RFC that describes 
well-known, registered, and ephemeral ports?  The first two of them are mentioned in the IANA port number assignment 
list:

        http://www.iana.org/assignments/port-numbers

but that doesn't mention ephemeral ports.

___________________________________________________________________________
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