(just added myself to the mailing list so I can include reply history to the 
topic.  This message touches on both Jaap's and Roland's comments)

Profinet and Ethercat were the 2 protocols I was most looking at to convert to 
built-ins.  Being in the industrial protocol space, they are (could be) the 
most useful to me.  I've looked at the Profinet code, and I don't really think 
it can be squeezed into a single file.  There are multiple protocols, each with 
drastically different dependencies(DCE/RPC for I/O and DCOM for CBA), but also 
"common code" as well (packet-pn.[ch]).   
 
While I see "grouped protocols" in the current epan\dissector directory, I 
thought maybe Profinet could have its own directory off of it if otherwise 
'pollutes' the main dissector directory.  I just see the plugins directory as 
"Windows only", and I don't think any protocol should be limited if there isn't 
anything "Windows specific" about it.  My goal is to just increase "platform 
independent" code.  
 
The part of Jaap's message that I sort of understand is the request to keep 
dissectors as plugins for proprietary reasons.  Profinet/Ethercat/Modbus/CIP 
are all proprietary protocols (as I assume there are many others that Wireshark 
dissects), but I think Modbus and CIP have taken the attitude of having 
Wireshark know about the protocol increases their use so they are more apt to 
let it go.  Perhaps the Profinet and Ethercat organizations don't feel the same 
way.  It sounds like part of "development speed" is that plugin updates be can 
distributed via the DLL much faster than Wireshark publishes releases (doesn't 
everybody want their patches to be applied ASAP?).  What also confuses me is 
the GNU licensing part of it.  If the code is there anyway, what is being 
protected?   Are they worried a novice developer will submit a patch that 
messes up the dissector?  Unless the core developers have been given 
instructions to only accept patches from particular people, that could still 
happen with the plugin.




___________________________________________________________________________
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