Hello!
I check my implementation of SIP client.
You completely right, that it was error in our code!
That's mean, that ethereal works o'k with SIP header.
Now I check second problem (error with boundary).
Best Regards!
Yury.
-----Original Message-----
From: Anders Broman (AL/EAB) [mailto:anders.broman@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 1:55 PM
To: 'Ethereal development'
Subject: RE: [Ethereal-dev] Changes for sip-t decoding
Hi,
I checked in a change to packet-sip.c to remove any spaces before the
parameter in the line ( space after ; ) :
Content-type: multypart/mixed ; boundary....
Are you saying this didn't work ? I coundn't test it as packet 3 in your
trace isn't decoded because of the wrongly coded(?) SIP URI.
Could you apply your changes to the latest CVS version of packet-sip.c and
try it, or send a diff -u file and I could try it out.
Best regards
Anders
-----Original Message-----
From: ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Chernishov Yury
Sent: den 7 april 2004 04:45
To: 'Ethereal development'
Subject: RE: [Ethereal-dev] Changes for sip-t decoding
Hi!
Does SIP-T part works for you? I mean multupart/mixed dissection.
As far as I can judge, packet-multupart.c receive wrong data
from packet-sip.c about "boundary" value
(the problem is "space" character before "bondary" value)!
Therefore packet-multipart.c can not separate
different multipart from each other correctly!
Can somebody send me trace for ethereal, if it works for you?
-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Morriss [mailto:jeff_morriss@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 8:16 PM
To: Ethereal development
Subject: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Changes for sip-t decoding
Anders Broman (AL/EAB) wrote:
> Hi,
> Note that this is only affecting SIP-T.
> With the present code a line in the GUI containing a SIP/application/isup
would look like :
>
> 13 0.302286 10.28.2.11 10.28.1.11 SIP/ISUP Status: 183 Session
Progress, ISUP:reserved
> Without "ISUP" it'd look :
>
> 13 0.302286 10.28.2.11 10.28.1.11 SIP/ISUP Status: 183 Session
Progress, reserved
>
> I thought with the former it was clearer that "reserved" belonged to the
ISUP dissection rather than to SIP.
> But feel free to change it if you like, I have no strong preferenses
either way.
Oops, my bad. I thought this change was in 'dissect_isup()', not in
'dissect_application_isup()' (I keep forgetting that there are multiple
entry points in the ISUP dissector). Sorry for the noise.
_______________________________________________
Ethereal-dev mailing list
Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev
_______________________________________________
Ethereal-dev mailing list
Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev
_______________________________________________
Ethereal-dev mailing list
Ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.ethereal.com/mailman/listinfo/ethereal-dev