On Dec 16, 2013, at 8:48 AM, Martin Kaiser <[email protected]> wrote:
> The idea would be to allow filtering for this element although it has no
> value (it's just there).
Do you mean "this is a byte array field that has a length that can range from 0
to {some maximum value}", so that the field might have some value in some
packets, or do you mean "I just want to add a flag to a packet, carrying one
bit's worth of information by its presence or absence"?
In the latter case, a (computed) FT_NONE or FT_BOOLEAN field would be more
appropriate than an FT_BYTES field.
(Or perhaps what you really want is an expert info item.)
___________________________________________________________________________
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
