On May 28, 2018, at 3:39 PM, Craig Jackson <[email protected]> wrote:

> However, it looks like the example suggests the answer, without explicitly 
> stating it: If the VISITED flag is not set, then this is the first trip 
> through the dissector for this packet, and therefore the packets are being 
> processed in order. This would allow it to remember a pending request name in 
> the conversation structure, and use it when the response is handled. It would 
> be useful to have this documented somewhere: "If the VISITED flag is not 
> true, then the packets are being processed in the order they were received."

That should probably be explicitly stated.  Please either submit a bug against 
the documentation or a Gerrit change.

> The other interesting point is that both iscsi and rpc choose to use trees 
> instead of hashes to store their data. It would be interesting to have the 
> tradeoffs documented, especially with regards to memory overhead.

Yes.  Please submit a separate bug about 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