On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 1:52 PM, Simon Barber via Wireshark-dev
<wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> wrote:
> Looks OK to me - I'd want to see it as a separate change though.

Hmmm, I could extract that as a separate change ... and then use it in
the 802.11ax changes. Not sure if it is worth the effort.

I will probably change things a bit though to better conform with
IEEE80211-2016 (and the 802.11ax do not change things in regard to
what I am thinking of). That is because 802.11-2016 (and probably
earlier) do mention BlockAckReqs and BlockAcks, and do not mention
responses, and also insert BAR and BA in places, so it will probably
be better to conform to the spec. There is a relatively easy to do
that, I believe.

> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 12:39 PM, Richard Sharpe
> <realrichardsha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 12:33 PM, Simon Barber via Wireshark-dev
>> <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> wrote:
>> > Can you post the code to gerrit (mark as WIP) so we can see exactly what
>> > you've done?
>>
>> Well, it's already there ... have a bug fix though because I got a
>> capture with block acks (but not HE block acks ...)
>>
>> It is, of course, mixed in with a lot of other changes:
>>
>> https://code.wireshark.org/review/#/c/25685
>>
>> > On Mon, Feb 19, 2018 at 12:13 PM, Richard Sharpe
>> > <realrichardsha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi folks,
>> >>
>> >> In handling 802.11ax Trigger requests I have refactored the handling
>> >> of block acks.
>> >>
>> >> In doing so I have eliminated the distinction between Block Ack
>> >> Requests and Block Acks in the search filters.
>> >>
>> >> They used to be things like 'wlan.bar.blah-blah' and
>> >> 'wlan.ba.blah-blah'.
>> >>
>> >> They are all no just 'wlan.ba.blah-blah'.
>> >>
>> >> Does anyone have an opinion on whether or not that is unreasonable?
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Richard Sharpe
>> >> (何以解憂?唯有杜康。--曹操)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ___________________________________________________________________________
>> >> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
>> >> Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
>> >> Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>> >>
>> >> mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ___________________________________________________________________________
>> > Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
>> > Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
>> > Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>> >
>> > mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Richard Sharpe
>> (何以解憂?唯有杜康。--曹操)
>>
>> ___________________________________________________________________________
>> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
>> Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
>> Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>>
>> mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
> Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>              mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe



-- 
Regards,
Richard Sharpe
(何以解憂?唯有杜康。--曹操)
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe

Reply via email to