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,
>>
>> What do you think--how should we go about this?
>>
>> -J
>>
>> Glattfelder Christoph (glc) wrote:
>>> Hello Jeff
>>>
>>> Unfortunately, a frame must be searched for the trailer to recognize it as 
>>> PRP frame. But I see no problem to have it disabled by default. 
>>>
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>>
>>> Christoph Glattfelder
>>>
>>> Z??rcher Hochschule Winterthur
>>> Institute of Embedded Systems - InES
>>>
>>> Technikumstrasse 9
>>> Postfach 805
>>> CH-8401 Winterthur
>>> Tel. +41(0)52 260 69 74
>>>
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Urspr??ngliche Nachricht-----
>>> Von: Jeff Morriss [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
>>> Gesendet: Montag, 16. April 2007 10:26
>>> An: Developer support list for Wireshark; Glattfelder Christoph (glc)
>>> Betreff: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Parallel Redundancy Protocol (PRP) dissector
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Meier Sven (msv) wrote:
>>>> This is a dissector for the Parallel Redundancy Protocol (PRP) defined 
>>>> in chapter 6 of the IEC 62439.
>>>>
>>>> PRP uses two independent networks in parallel and allows redundancy 
>>>> without switchovers.
>>>>
>>>> The protocol is sending Mac multicast messages with Ethertype 0x88fb. In 
>>>> addition to that it adds to every Ethernet frame a 4 byte trailer before 
>>>> the FCS. The trailer is detected by checking a size field and an 
>>>> identifier which are part of the trailer. Therefore, if the last 4 bytes 
>>>> of a frame match a correct trailer they get interpreted as a trailer, 
>>>> although it was probably not a real one.
>>> Is there some way to know if the trailer is going to be there without 
>>> searching for it?  As it is, registered as a postdissector (didn't even 
>>> know those existed until now), this dissector will get called for every 
>>> frame--which seems a bit excessive to me.
>>>
>>> If there's no way to know ahead of time, maybe this dissector should be 
>>> disabled by default, though I'm not sure how to best go about doing that.
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
> 
_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev

Reply via email to