> > >>> >> >> At present, I want to check the LTE MAC dissector. Could you give me >> some information about your solution of checking the code through wireshark? >> >> > > I'll send a brief email to wireshark-dev after I commit the code to > subversion (I'm one of the maintainers with write access to subversion). > You do need to attach some configuration information to each frame in order > to decode it, I'll show how I do it for my company's log file format. > >
I will appreciate it. > >> >>> >>> Note that Wireshark already has support for several LTE signalling >>> protocols (S1AP, X2AP, RRC, NAS), and and although they're not normally >>> carried over TCP I'm sure we could allow them to be decoded over a >>> configured TCP port. >>> >> >> >> I see some code about the RRC in wireshark. It seems we could not decode >> the LTE data directly because there is no LTE card. So I want to decode the >> LTE data through a configured TCP port(At present we use the port 9999 as a >> test.). But how could my LTE code be added into this >> dissector(tcp.port=9999) perfectly? Could you give me some suggestions? >> > > Is your data on top of TCP MAC/RLC/PDCP/RRC, or just RRC? > > If its just RRC, its not just a case of calling the RRC dissector, you need > to call the correct entry point, which depends upon the RLC logical channel > type it was carried upon. So you'd need some way of knowing which type of > channel a TCP connection was carrying. > > > It is LTE MAC data and the wireshark(libpcap) capture the data through tcp.port(9999). Now I want to add the MAC code into the tcp.port(9999) dissector.(I added this dissector into wireshark) If I just want to test my MAC code, is this methor ok? If it is ok, which APIs in wireshark should I use? Thank you very much! Best wishes, Yuming > >> Thank you! >> >> Best wishes, >> Yuming >> >> >> >>> >>> Martin >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ___________________________________________________________________________ >>>>> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> >>>>> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev >>>>> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev >>>>> mailto:[email protected] >>>>> ?subject=unsubscribe >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ___________________________________________________________________________ >>>> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> >>>> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev >>>> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev >>>> mailto:[email protected] >>>> ?subject=unsubscribe >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ___________________________________________________________________________ >>> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> >>> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev >>> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev >>> mailto:[email protected] >>> ?subject=unsubscribe >>> >> >> >> >> ___________________________________________________________________________ >> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> >> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev >> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev >> mailto:[email protected] >> ?subject=unsubscribe >> > > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> > Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev > Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev > mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe >
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
