On Feb 12, 2017, at 11:40 PM, Paul Offord <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'll accept whatever strategy there is for taps vs. dissectors.  A few points:
> 
> * TRANSUM can only work if it is able to calculate values based on other 
> dissected values (such as smb2.msg_id), so provided the dissected values are 
> available to the tap on both passes (via a protocol tree or otherwise) that 
> would be OK

If the tap is registered with TL_REQUIRES_PROTO_TREE, the protocol tree will be 
provided to it on all passes.  If it's one of these new "early" taps, the 
protocol tree will have the results of all dissectors except for 
post-dissectors.

> * I've never written a tap before but I think if the tap runs after all other 
> dissectors this wouldn't be a problem for TRANSUM

It has to run before the post-dissectors that add things to trees...

...unless we allow taps that are handed a protocol tree to add fields to the 
protocol tree, in which case the post-dissector would be unnecessary and the 
new type of "early" taps would also be unnecessary.

> * When a dissector registers a tap, Wireshark passes a protocol tree to a 
> dissector based on the criteria Michael defined, so some thought would be 
> needed regarding this for consistency (unless Tshark shouldn't work like 
> Wireshark)

The only form of consistency that we will ever provide, with regard to 
providing a protocol tree to modules, is "a tap that requests a protocol tree 
will always be handed a protocol tree".

The criteria for deciding whether to provide a protocol tree to dissectors are 
internal to particular releases of particular protocols, are not part of any 
Wireshark APIs, and are subject to change without notice.  "Consistency", 
whether between Wireshark and TShark, between "Wireshark running with color 
filters" and "Wireshark running with no color filters", between releases of 
Wireshark/TShark, etc., doesn't apply to that.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe

Reply via email to