Re: [Wireshark-commits] rev 39143: /trunk/epan/dissectors/ /trunk/epan/dissectors/: packet-dvbci.c

[Martin Kaiser <lists () kaiser cx>]

Dear all,

I wanted to discuss this as well to make sure that my next submissions
are in line with your policy, but you were faster ;-)

Thus wrote Maynard, Chris (Christopher.Maynard () GTECH COM):

> > -----Original Message-----

> >  From me:
> >  Change ENC_NA to ENC_BIG_ENDIAN as i suppose this is a big endian
> > protocol and ENC_NA was erroneously used for irems bigger than i
> > byte
> > in some cases.

> This is a good example of the problem that can occur with using
> ENC_NA.

What problem can occur with ENC_NA here?

My assumption was that ENC_BIG_ENDIAN/_LITTLE_ENDIAN is only applicable
to multi-byte numeric values, i.e. FT_(U)INT16/32/64. For FT_(U)INT8 and
FT_BYTES, FT_STRING etc., I used ENC_NA.

Anders' assumption is correct: all multi-byte values in DVB-CI are big
endian.

Best regards,

   Martin
___________________________________________________________________________
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