On 5/7/2009 9:10 AM, Sébastien Tandel wrote:
> On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 03:05, Stephen Donnelly <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Aaron Turner wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 8:59 PM, Michael Tüxen
>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> On May 6, 2009, at 3:40 PM, Aaron Turner wrote:
>>> I think this is confusing to many people and is more likely to have
>>> unintended consequences. Most users don't consider CLI option
>>> ordering to have special meaning. Personally, I prefer Stephen's
>>> suggestion of directly linking the filter to the interface ala -i
>>> en0:"sctp && host a.b.c.d" if you want to get fancy.
>>>
>>> It also means the old style cli args could easliy be grand-fathered in
>>> (any interface without a specific filter uses the global filter).
>
> Completely agree to define something which is explicitly linked to which
> interface the filter belongs. Ordering parameters is not intuitive.
>
>
> I you do decide to go this way, ':' might not be the best delimiter
>> character to use. It is already used in libpcap interface names and
>> could cause parsing headaches.
>>
>> I think some OSes use ':' in vlan interface names? Also ':' is used in
>> dag interface names to indicate sub streams, e.g. "dag0:2".
>>
>
> ':' is indeed confusing. It is used by Linux to define virtual interfaces
> like eth0:1
>
I had also thought of suggesting ":", but see the overloading problem
now as Stephen D. pointed out... which reminded me of maybe another
potential clash:
From a "preferences" file:
<... snip ...>
# Interface descriptions.
# Ex: eth0(eth0 descr),eth1(eth1 descr),...
capture.devices_descr: \Device\NPF_{"Windows-string"}(Intel NIC)
</snip>
... although I can't think of a clash with this off-hand right now.
Maybe this is better?:
dumpcap -n -i dag0:2,"sctp && host 1.2.3.4" -i en0
In the parser, you should probably check for and allow use of single
quotes too (e.g. shell scripts), like:
dumpcap -n -i dag0:2,'sctp && host 1.2.3.4' -i en0
So any trailing capture filter on the command-line would apply to
interfaces that do *NOT* have a format like:
<interface_name>,<filter_string>
-Nathan
___________________________________________________________________________
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
