Wireshark mailing list archives

Re: False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function.

From: Dario Lombardo <dario.lombardo.ml () gmail com>
Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 09:45:40 +0100

On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 6:18 PM, Anders Broman <a.broman58 () gmail com> wrote:

I suspected as much, but I think all the sip lines skip the CRLF...


What about adding the skipped bytes as hidden, labeled as "unused bytes"?

___________________________________________________________________________
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:

False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function. Anders Broman (Feb 12)
- Re: False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function. Dario Lombardo (Feb 12)
  - Re: False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function. Anders Broman (Feb 12)
    - Re: False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function. Dario Lombardo (Feb 13)
    - Re: False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function. Anders Broman (Feb 13)
    - Re: False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function. Dario Lombardo (Feb 13)
    - Re: False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function. Anders Broman (Feb 13)
    - Re: False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function. Dario Lombardo (Feb 13)
    - Re: False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function. Jeff Morriss (Feb 13)
    - Re: False positive from the new "Look for incomplete dissectors" function. Dario Lombardo (Feb 17)