Dear all,
is there any reason why the V5UA plugin does not use the IANA registered
port 5675, but 10001? The code just says:
/* In RFC specification the SCTP registered User Port Number
Assignment for V5UA is 5675 */
/* #define SCTP_PORT_V5UA 5675 */
#define SCTP_PORT_V5UA 10001
If
Problem is that how you print 64-bit numbers varies. %llu doesn't
always work (for example the Windoze buildbot is now red). Instead the
PRI*64 macros should be used.
Sebastien Tandel wrote:
> checked in rev 21975. Thanks!
>
> Regards,
> Sebastien Tandel
>
> On 24 May 2007, at 09:47, David
Kevin A. Noll wrote:
>
> I think I've figured out that I am getting the DISSECTOR_ASSERT because of
> something related to the dissector being near the end of the tvbuff.
> However, I've tried several things to try to debug exactly what occuring,
> but I can't get the error to go away.
>
> This
Barry Gould wrote:
> Hi,
> I've successfully statically built tethereal before on linux, but
> when I tried with tshark/wireshark 0.99.5, I keep getting errors like this:
> can't find -lgmodule
>
> I've tried
> --enable-static --disable-wireshark --enable-tshark --disable-gtk2
> and lots of othe
checked in rev 21975. Thanks!
Regards,
Sebastien Tandel
On 24 May 2007, at 09:47, David Howells wrote:
Fix compilation failures when building wireshark-0.99.6-SVN-21916
on an
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu target with gcc version 4.1.2 20070403
(Red Hat
4.1.2-8).
The failures fall into two cate
Oops, overlooked this one. Any idea *how*?
(I'm terribly busy these days so not much time to research it.)
Stephen Fisher wrote:
> Let's disable it by default to avoid the overhead of checking every
> packet.
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 05:53:19PM +0800, Jeff Morriss wrote:
>> Hi list,
>>
>>
Kevin A. Noll wrote:
> I am progressing on my updated WLCCP dissector, but I've run into another
> (amateur) issue. This protocol allows TLVs to be tacked on to the end of a
> packet with no indication of how many or how long they are until you start
> reading the TLVs and iterate through them un
Graeme Lunt wrote:
> You can create a shortcut to prepare the cmd.exe environment for building
> wireshark.
>
> Right click on the desktop and choose "New/Shortcut"
>
> In the resulting wizard, enter the following for the "location of the item":
Just wanted to say thanks for this--setting up m
I think I've figured out that I am getting the DISSECTOR_ASSERT because of
something related to the dissector being near the end of the tvbuff.
However, I've tried several things to try to debug exactly what occuring,
but I can't get the error to go away.
This error occurs when I am reading a st
Below you find improvements for the AMR dissector.
Following items are changed:
*) Bandwidth efficient decoding re-implemented with expert-info support.
The old implementation supported a single frame only.
*) Support for AMR-WB added
*) Fixes for IF1 and IF2 decoding
Index: packet-amr.c
Hi!
Another try...
Lars
Lars Ruoff wrote:
Here it is.
br,
Lars
Stephen Fisher wrote:
Could you please send these as unified diffs (diff -u or using the svn
diff command) so we can tell the context the changes are made in
without having to cross-reference the source files.
On Tue, May 0
Martin Mathieson wrote:
> I see in this interview
> (http://www.wimax.com/commentary/spotlight/interview-with-mobile-metrics)
> that dissectors for R6, R4 and R3 will hopefully be submitted soon.
And hopefully all the people working on WiMAX dissectors are working
*together* on WiMAX dissector
or
2) just use Intel's dissector by getting a recent buildbot build.
___
Intel has supplied dissectors for wireless interface protocols. I
understand that WiMAX involves other interfaces/protocols (it looks like the
air interface may be R1 &
Jeff Morriss wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> http://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=1416
>>
>>
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] changed:
>
> [...]
>
>> Your SuSE system must have -fstack-protector / -fstack-protector-all enabled
>> by
>> default in gcc. More information about this imple
Guy Harris wrote:
> However, that *still* means it's called more than once. When a capture
> file is read in, each packet is dissected. After that, every time you
> click on a packet, it's dissected again.
I.e., even if we arrange that the dissector is only called once when you
click on a pa
rohit khare wrote:
> i am working on a WIMAX dissector.
So were Intel; they contributed their dissector, which is checked into
the current version of the Wireshark code base.
> I am not getting that why the module is getting called up twice in some
> cases even after it has digonosed successful
16 matches
Mail list logo
