Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: Sub_dissectors assertion failed
From: Scott <theerickson () gmail com>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 13:18:00 -0600
On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu> wrote:
So that means that either the IP protocol rider protocol, or the custom protocol, needs to have a field giving the protocol number of the protocol that runs top the custom protocol. Which of of them has that field?
The IP Rider contains that field.
I overcame the problem of the protocols not matching by seeing that theprotocol number copied over from IP to my IP rider and *supposedly* stored in hf_[IPR protocol] field was incorrect. It was 65,000 something when printf'd. What does hf_register_info do with that variable (hf_[IPR protocol])? What do you mean by "hf_[IPR protocol]"?
Sorry, I wasn't especially clear. I meant one of the variables declared as: static int hf_IPR_protocol = -1; that is used in the hf_register_info struct. I didn't know what those were for (I thought they stored the actual value extracted from the packet), but you answered my question with:
the hf_ values set by proto_register_field_array(), are used as indices into a big table of structures giving information about protocols and fields. Those indices are passed to various routines that add items to protocol trees, as well as some other routines.
If this is still the wrong format (calling dissector_try_port twice or otherwise), please let me know! Otherwise, here comes another question. I solved the problem exhibited in: http://img80.imageshack.us/img80/5582/malformed.gif by hardcoding a value into the reported_length parameter of tvb_new_subset() instead of using -1. This is obviously not a long term solution, so what I need to get at is the IP header's value for "Total Length" (ip.len). Is there a function for that? Thank you, Scott
___________________________________________________________________________ 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:
- Re: MacOSX snow leo integration, (continued)
- Re: MacOSX snow leo integration H.sivank (May 22)
- Re: MacOSX snow leo integration Guy Harris (May 22)
- Re: MacOSX snow leo integration H.sivank (May 23)
- Re: MacOSX snow leo integration Guy Harris (May 24)
- Re: MacOSX snow leo integration H.sivank (May 25)
- Re: MacOSX snow leo integration Stephen Fisher (May 25)
- Re: MacOSX snow leo integration H.sivank (May 25)
- Re: Sub_dissectors assertion failed Guy Harris (May 22)
- Re: Sub_dissectors assertion failed Scott (May 24)
- Re: Sub_dissectors assertion failed Guy Harris (May 24)
- Re: Sub_dissectors assertion failed Scott (May 24)
- Re: Sub_dissectors assertion failed Jakub Zawadzki (May 24)
- Re: Sub_dissectors assertion failed Guy Harris (May 24)
- Re: Sub_dissectors assertion failed Scott (May 25)
- Re: Sub_dissectors assertion failed Bryan Miller (May 22)