Jeff Morriss wrote: >> Q1: Can anyone suggest the appropriate resolution of these conflicts ? > > Does that (the registration loss + memory leak) still happen if the > dissectors are "new style"? I would think that converting them to "new > style" dissectors "should" be the answer but I didn't look into it.
Having dug a bit further into the three protocols I'm inclined to just do a dissector_add_handle in the airopeek & cpfi dissectors leaving only the tapa dissector registered on port 5000. 1. Currently it appears that the airopeek dissector can already only be accessed via decode-as. 2. It also appears that the cpfi dissector can currently only be accessed via decode-as (or by changing cpfi port preference). In any case: Two of the dissectors (cpfi and tapa) are already new-style. The issue, unfortunately, is that currently all 3 dissectors explicitly register themselves to udp port 5000 via dissector_add(). Since there's no checking in dissector_add for duplicate registrations the net result is that the last dissector to register on udp port 5000 wins with the previous registrations being obliterated. _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list Wireshark-dev@wireshark.org https://wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
