Hi Jaap, Great, thanks very much then! If I can clean up the RPL decoders I might try to submit a patch for that too.
Regards, -Colin -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jaap Keuter Sent: September 30, 2010 8:46 PM To: Developer support list for Wireshark Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] 6LoWPAN Updates & I-D Status Hi Colin, I've committed both patches. No worries about pending IANA assignment, that will be worked out before a new stable branch will be created. Thanks, Jaap On 09/30/2010 02:50 PM, Colin O'Flynn wrote: > Hello, > > #1) > > There was an update to the 6LoWPAN patch from a while back to add > missing features, specifically "context-based" decompression. > > In addition I've updated that patch to support the latest version of the > 6lowpan standard, hc-13. Note that hc-13 has gone to last call and is > unlikely to change the protocol format. > > The patch is attached to > https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5085 . I've tested > this patch, and am also aware of a number of other people testing the > patch as well. > > Would it be possible to get this committed to SVN and thus closed? > > #2) > > There are several I-D's which define new protocols. Two important > updates for 6lowpan people are 6lowpan-nd (neighbor discovery > extensions) and RPL (routing protocols). > > 6lowpan-nd is in working-group last-call and seems unlikely to change, > there is a patch to add support at > https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5086 . > > The I-D however requires the assignment of 3 ND option types by the > IANA, and is temporarily using 31/32/33 as the types as defined in the > I-D. Thus the patch has these hard-coded in just like the other ND > options in packet-ipv6.h. But according to > http://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters this already conflicts > with another option. > > How is this normally handled? Is it possible to get the code committed > despite not having official IANA assignments, and they are just updated > when they become official? Even if they were defined to zero, which > isn't used, it would help as at least the code is present, and thus the > final "patch" is much smaller. > > Regards, > > -Colin > ___________________________________________________________________________ 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
