checked in
On 10/29/06, Sake Blok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > The attached file is a patch to packet-bpdu.c so that Wireshark is > able to dissect the Cisco MST BPDU's that I encountered last week. > > Cheers, > > > Sake > > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2006 at 12:32:00AM +0200, Sake Blok wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Yesterday I was troubleshooting a spanning-tree issue at a customer. > > The customer is running MST and I collected some BPDU's. Unfortunately > > these BPDU's are not properly decoded by Wireshark. In order to start > > writing my first (real) addition to Wireshark I downloaded the > > IEEE 802.1D-2004 and the IEEE 802.1Q-2003 and read though them (I added > > a link to IEEE 802.1Q-2003 to the Wiki page on STP). > > > > To me it looks like the BPDU-packet layout described in that document > > is not the one I am seeing in my tracefile. First of all the > > Configuration Identifier field (octet 39 of the BPDU) is not 0 as > > the IEEE document states, but seems to be the length of the MST extension > > data in de BPDU. Also the Extension data is formatted differently from the > > specs. > > > > Does anyone know if the Cisco-implementation of MST is proprietary? Or is > > there maybe a standard that evolved after 2003? Any documentation on > > (cisco) MST BPDU's is welcome. Also if someone has some STP, RST and MST > > packets laying around in traces, please send them to me so when I write > > a patch I can make sure I don't break things for other BPDU's :) > > > > Cheers, > > > > Sake > > _______________________________________________ > > Wireshark-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev > > _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
