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

[Anders Broman <a.broman58 () gmail com>]

Den 13 feb 2015 09:45 skrev "Dario Lombardo" <dario.lombardo.ml () gmail com>:
> 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"?
First thought is, unnecessary processing to satisfy this new functionality,
which frankly I have my doubts about...
___________________________________________________________________________
> 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

___________________________________________________________________________
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