On Apr 12, 2019, at 10:15 AM, Johannes Berg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Agree. Sorry about that. No disrespect was intended, but I'm still not
> sure I understand the need for UDP encapsulation *as part of the
> protocol*. I guess saying "GSMTAP can optionally be encapsulated in UDP
> with the well-known port xyz" would be something else, and it'd make
> more sense to me than saying it has to be.
I see nothing about a struct gsmtap_hdr:
http://osmocom.org/projects/baseband/wiki/GSMTAP
that
1) requires that it plus the payload be encapsulated in a UDP datagram
or
2) would prevent it from being at the beginning of a
LINKTYPE_GSMTAP/DLT_GSMTAP packet in a pcap or pcapng file.
