Am 16.04.2011 10:23, schrieb Sake Blok:
> On 16 apr 2011, at 09:40, Anders Broman wrote:
>> First time I saw it - [Truncated] i found it a bit ambiguous perhaps it 
>> should say
>> [Display Truncated] even if that's a bit longish.
> 
> Or we should put the [truncated] at the end instead of the beginning? Than it 
> is also not to bad to make it longer, so we could even make it [truncated to 
> 240 bytes].
> 
> Sake
> 
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> 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
> 


I think the way this is being done is quite good. For most cases I don't
see the necessity to change this. I just wanted to clearly know about
the meaning in a quite special and particular case.

Recompiling with 0xFFFF helped to fully display the authorization header
token.

Greetings

___________________________________________________________________________
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