Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: Malformed Packet
From: "Ewgenij Sokolovski" <ewgenijkkg () gmx de>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 11:51:23 +0100
I like having malformed in the protocol tree, or at least I like to be able to use the 'malformed' filter. Note that it is also added hidden when malformed is used as a type of expert info.
I think "malformed" is OK if there is an explanation, what "malformed" in the particular case means. The packet is malformed indeed and it's good for error search and hierarchical structure of reporting:) But without an explanation the user is quite confused... So, should I submit an appropriate bug report to bugzilla? BR Ewgenij ___________________________________________________________________________ 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:
- Malformed Packet Ewgenij Sokolovski (Jan 10)
- Re: Malformed Packet Guy Harris (Jan 10)
- Re: Malformed Packet Ewgenij Sokolovski (Jan 10)
- Re: Malformed Packet Guy Harris (Jan 11)
- Re: Malformed Packet Ewgenij Sokolovski (Jan 11)
- Re: Malformed Packet Anders Broman (Jan 11)
- Re: Malformed Packet Ewgenij Sokolovski (Jan 11)
- Re: Malformed Packet Guy Harris (Jan 11)
- Re: Malformed Packet Martin Mathieson (Jan 11)
- Re: Malformed Packet Ewgenij Sokolovski (Jan 14)
- Re: Malformed Packet Martin Mathieson (Jan 14)
- Re: Malformed Packet Ewgenij Sokolovski (Jan 14)
- Re: Malformed Packet Martin Mathieson (Jan 14)
- Re: Malformed Packet Ewgenij Sokolovski (Jan 10)
- Re: Malformed Packet Guy Harris (Jan 10)