On 09/16/13 16:49, Guy Harris wrote:
On Sep 16, 2013, at 1:39 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/16/13 16:04, Guy Harris wrote:
On Sep 16, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Anders Broman a.bro...@bredband.net wrote:
If we decide to have it default off perhaps we shouldn't default to
Hi,
In serv_name_lookup() we call getservbyport() for ports not resolved in the
IANA port list the function
Seems quite expensive so my question is does it add any value or can I remove
it?
Regards
Anders
___
Sent via:
On 09/16/13 14:57, Guy Harris wrote:
On Sep 16, 2013, at 7:20 AM, Anders Broman anders.bro...@ericsson.com wrote:
In serv_name_lookup() we call getservbyport() for ports not resolved in the
IANA port list the function
Seems quite expensive so my question is does it add any value or can I
On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 03:17:54PM -0400, Jeff Morriss wrote:
On 09/16/13 14:57, Guy Harris wrote:
On Sep 16, 2013, at 7:20 AM, Anders Broman anders.bro...@ericsson.com
wrote:
In serv_name_lookup() we call getservbyport() for ports not resolved in
the IANA port list the function
On Sep 16, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Anders Broman a.bro...@bredband.net wrote:
I got rid of getservbyport() and added reading of the local services file
perhaps the read should be removed again?
Local services file as in /etc/services on UN*X and its equivalent on
Windows
Jeff Morriss skrev 2013-09-16 21:17:
On 09/16/13 14:57, Guy Harris wrote:
On Sep 16, 2013, at 7:20 AM, Anders Broman
anders.bro...@ericsson.com wrote:
In serv_name_lookup() we call getservbyport() for ports not resolved
in the IANA port list the function
Seems quite expensive so my
Should we, instead, look the port number up in the tcp.port or udp.port (or
sctp.port) dissector table and, if it finds a dissector handle, look up the short name of the
protocol for that dissector handle and use that?
I think this is more useful, since the dissector short name is typically
On Sep 16, 2013, at 1:39 PM, Jeff Morriss jeff.morriss...@gmail.com wrote:
On 09/16/13 16:04, Guy Harris wrote:
On Sep 16, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Anders Broman a.bro...@bredband.net wrote:
If we decide to have it default off perhaps we shouldn't default to write
User Datagram Protocol, Src
On 9/16/2013 4:15 PM, Dirk Jagdmann wrote:
Should we, instead, look the port number up in the tcp.port or
udp.port (or sctp.port) dissector table and, if it finds a
dissector handle, look up the short name of the protocol for that
dissector handle and use that?
I think this is more useful,
On 09/16/13 16:04, Guy Harris wrote:
On Sep 16, 2013, at 12:44 PM, Anders Broman a.bro...@bredband.net wrote:
I got rid of getservbyport() and added reading of the local services file
perhaps the read should be removed again?
Local services file as in /etc/services on UN*X and its
Should we, instead, look the port number up in the tcp.port or udp.port (or
sctp.port) dissector table and, if it finds a dissector handle, look up the short name of the
protocol for that dissector handle and use that?
I think this is more useful, since the dissector short name is typically
Wireshark has transport name resolution enabled by default.
Unfortunately protocol numbers often get mapped to the wrong name, which
can lead to confusion:
https://ask.wireshark.org/questions/10380/what-is-commplex-main
It seems like the services file has effectively become a list of
things not
On Apr 23, 2012, at 10:56 AM, Gerald Combs wrote:
Wireshark has transport name resolution enabled by default.
Unfortunately protocol numbers often get mapped to the wrong name, which
can lead to confusion:
https://ask.wireshark.org/questions/10380/what-is-commplex-main
It seems like the
On Apr 23, 2012, at 11:11 AM, Stephen Fisher wrote:
It still has useful matches including, but not limited to:
ssh (22)
domain (53)
http (80)
microsoft-ds (445)
router (520) - (I know, scary RIP...)
Note that we have dissectors for all of those (and that the names aren't the
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:24:02AM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
Note that we have dissectors for all of those (and that the names aren't the
protocol names, e.g. domain rather than DNS, microsoft-ds rather than
SMB, router rather than RIP).
The issues are probably mostly with the protocols not
Guy Harris guy@... writes:
Perhaps we should, instead, have our own table of port numbers-protocol
names.
In that case, would it make sense to add a preference to allow the user to
choose either the current services file for the mapping or to use the Wireshark
table?
To help support
16 matches
Mail list logo
