Wireshark mailing list archives

Re: HTTP header truncated


From: Alexander Koeppe <format_c () online de>
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2011 11:28:16 +0200

Am 16.04.2011 10:23, schrieb Sake Blok:
On 16 apr 2011, at 09:40, Anders Broman wrote:
First time I saw it - [Truncated] i found it a bit ambiguous perhaps it should say
[Display Truncated] even if that's a bit longish.

Or we should put the [truncated] at the end instead of the beginning? Than it is also not to bad to make it longer, 
so we could even make it [truncated to 240 bytes].

Sake

___________________________________________________________________________
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



I think the way this is being done is quite good. For most cases I don't
see the necessity to change this. I just wanted to clearly know about
the meaning in a quite special and particular case.

Recompiling with 0xFFFF helped to fully display the authorization header
token.

Greetings

___________________________________________________________________________
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: