On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 04:37:27PM -0400, Evan Huus wrote: > We already discard a great deal of state in (single-pass) tshark that we > keep around in Wireshark (or two-pass tshark).
Really? I'm not so sure about that 'great deal' I think right now we are only freeing protocol frame data list. > I dislike the idea of two-pass by default for exactly this reason: people > expect tshark to be relatively state-less. This is already not the case, > but it's a lot worse in two-pass mode. It might even make sense to add a > --state-less flag to tshark that disables all options which require state. > I don't know how feasible that would be however. If they want state-less they should probably use tcpdump. To be honest I don't like option --state-less (it'd be really hard to find), I'd rather make single pass really state-less (if that's what user expect). And if user want to do pro dissection -2 must be used anyway. ___________________________________________________________________________ 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
