Re: Wireshark Windows libraries

[Guy Harris <guy () alum mit edu>]

On Sep 5, 2019, at 10:45 AM, Pascal Quantin <pascal () wireshark org> wrote:
> Le jeu. 5 sept. 2019 à 19:40, Jaap Keuter <jaap.keuter () xs4all nl> a écrit :
> > So, are the new maintenance releases pending on yet another Npcap release?
> > Noticed that Npcap 0.9983 was just release today.
>
> I will update our bundled Npcap (as usual) but like last time I wait a bit to ensure that no blocking bug appears in 
> their bug tracker right after the release.

See bug 14101

        https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=14101

and bug 15575

        https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=15575

both of which should be addressed by 0.9983.  0.9983 also apparently does loopback capture in a different fashion:

        Loopback capture and injection no longer requires the Npcap Loopback Adapter to be installed. This is a minor 
API change, so Nmap 7.80 and earlier will still require the adapter to do localhost scans, but Wireshark and most other 
software will not require changes. Loopback capture uses the device name NPF_Loopback instead of NPF_{GUID}, where GUID 
has to be looked up in the Registry. The Npcap Loopback Adapter can still be installed by selecting "Legacy loopback 
support" in the installer or using the /loopback_support=yes command-line option. The LoopbackSupport Registry value 
will always be 0x00000001.

Somebody claims, in this Q&A question:

        https://ask.wireshark.org/question/11356/loopback-npcap-added-in-win10-network/

that the loopback adapter is causing a problem, although I don't understand what the problem is ("The reason we have to 
disable it, it is showing APIPA 169.254.x.x and therefore affecting my Image program Storagecraft Image Manager which 
points to 127.0.0.1"?  The Npcap Loopback Adapter isn't showing a normal loopback address, it's showing a non-loopback 
APIPA-assigned address, and that's somehow breaking normal network access to the local host using the loopback 
address?), so maybe that will fix that issue as well.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe