Although i was able to reassemble and dissect  3 packets sent sequential, by
using the* tcp_dissect_pdus* method ,
once a message is greater then  1500 bytes and is being divided into
fragments (not by me) , the *tcp_dissect_pdus*  method , doesn't help
anymore , and my dissector is never called .

Whats the difference  ?
should i do something different if the message is disassembled not by me .


thanks


2009/2/23 ronnie sahlberg <[email protected]>

>  >but i noticed that the TCP checksum test fails
>
> That may be an issue. Try disabling TCP checksum validation in the
> preferences for TCP.
>
> By default, TCP reassembly will ignore all packets with a checksum failure
> or "short" packets. (i.e. packets captures with a snaplen smaller than the
> ethernet mtu)
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:57 PM, יוני תובל <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>  hi , thanks .
>> it seems to be working , but only when i raise the flag 
>> "pinfo->can_desegment=1
>> "  inside the get_len method .
>> but i noticed that the TCP checksum test fails in all the reassembled
>> packets .
>> why is that ?
>> actually it also fails when i send the whole message in one buffer ...
>> so its probably a different issue . . .
>>
>>
>> thanks
>>  2009/2/23 Guy Harris <[email protected]>
>>
>>>
>>>  On Feb 23, 2009, at 12:59 AM, יוני תובל wrote:
>>>
>>> > i tried to return the entire message length . still fails .
>>> > (it only succeeds when the tvb consists of the entire message )
>>> > What about he offest value we pass to the get_len method .
>>>
>>>  It's the offset into the tvbuff handed to the get_len routine of the
>>> first byte of the packet whose length should be returned.
>>>
>>> Presumably the PDUs consist of a 2-byte length field (in network byte
>>> order?) followed by that number of bytes of data, and, in the get_len
>>> routine, you fetch the length value from the packet, add 2 to it, and
>>> return that value.
>>>
>>> ___________________________________________________________________________
>>> 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

Reply via email to