[Gilbert Ramirez <gilbertr@xxxxxxxxx>]

Here is what I have found:

cops.in-int.ipv4 has a bitmask 0xffff but is type FT_IPv4
cops.in-int.ipv6 has a bitmask 0xffff but is type FT_IPv6
cops.out-int.ipv4 has a bitmask 0xffff but is type FT_IPv4
cops.out-int.ipv6 has a bitmask 0xffff but is type FT_IPv6
cops.pdprediraddr.ipv4 has a bitmask 0xffff but is type FT_IPv4
cops.pdprediraddr.ipv6 has a bitmask 0xffff but is type FT_IPv6
cops.lastpdpaddr.ipv4 has a bitmask 0xffff but is type FT_IPv4
cops.lastpdpaddr.ipv6 has a bitmask 0xffff but is type FT_IPv6
cops.pc_mm_classifier_src_addr has a bitmask 0xffff but is type FT_IPv4
cops.pc_mm_classifier_dst_addr has a bitmask 0xffff but is type FT_IPv4
image-gif.image has a bitmask 0x80 but is type FT_NONE

I wrote a script to find this information; I'm checking in that script now.

Gerald - the script could be added to buildbot:

$ ./tools/ftsanity.py location-of-tethereal

--gilbert

On 5/27/05, vasanth.manickam@xxxxxx <vasanth.manickam@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
> Can you send me some more examples... I can help you clean them up..
> Regards
> Vasanth Manickam
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gilbert Ramirez
> Sent: 26 May 2005 16:19
> To: Ethereal development
> Subject: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Patch (PDML fields less than one byte)
> 
> 
> Thanks. I'm testing this; it turns out there are some non-integer fields
> with bitmasks defined for them, like FT_NONE fields! I'm tracking these
> down.
> 
> --gilbert
> 
> On 5/25/05, vasanth.manickam@xxxxxx <vasanth.manickam@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > Sorry for spamming again..   I am unable to format the patch in the
> > mail.. Attaching the file now...
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > vasanth.manickam@xxxxxx
> > Sent: 25 May 2005 16:31
> > To: ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx; gram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [Ethereal-dev] Patch (PDML fields less than one byte)
> >
> >
> > Oops in the previous mail the patch seems to be formatted all wrong...
> >
> > --- print1.c    2005-05-25 13:13:53.000000000 +0100
> > +++ print.c     2005-05-25 16:09:25.301581248 +0100
> > @@ -346,6 +346,13 @@
> >                         }
> >                         if (fi->length > 0) {
> >                                 fputs("\" value=\"", pdata->fh);
> > +
> > +                               if(fi->hfinfo->bitmask!=0){
> > +
> > fprintf(pdata->fh,"%X",fvalue_get_integer(&fi->value));
> > +                                       fputs("\"
> > unmaskedvalue=\"",pdata->fh);
> > +
> > write_pdml_field_hex_value(pdata,fi);
> > +                               }
> > +                               else
> >                                 write_pdml_field_hex_value(pdata,fi);
> >                         }
> >                 }
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > vasanth.manickam@xxxxxx
> > Sent: 25 May 2005 16:21
> > To: gram@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; ethereal-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [Ethereal-dev] Patch (PDML fields less than one byte)
> >
> >
> > Ok I have fixed the patch to accommodate "unmaskedvalue" and also
> > corrected a small error which applied the changes to some fields which
> 
> > were not necessarily subfields.  I am new to contributing code to open
> 
> > source projects...  Please guide me on how I can get this patch
> > verified and make it into the main build...
> >
> > Vasanth Manickam
> >
> >
> > --- print.c     2005-05-25 13:13:53.000000000 +0100
> > +++ print1.c    2005-05-25 16:09:25.301581248 +0100
> > @@ -346,6 +346,13 @@
> >                         }
> >                         if (fi->length > 0) {
> >                                 fputs("\" value=\"", pdata->fh);
> > +
> > +                               if(fi->hfinfo->bitmask!=0){
> > +                                       fprintf(pdata->fh, "%X",
> > fvalue_get_integer(&fi->value));
> > +                                       fputs("\" unmaskedvalue=\"",
> > pdata->fh);
> > +
> > write_pdml_field_hex_value(pdata, fi);
> > +                               }
> > +                               else
> >                                 write_pdml_field_hex_value(pdata, fi);
> >                         }
> >                 }
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> > [mailto:ethereal-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Gilbert
> > Ramirez
> > Sent: 24 May 2005 15:38
> > To: Ethereal development
> > Subject: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Patch (PDML fields less than one byte)
> >
> >
> > Upon further reading of the PDML specification at:
> >
> > http://analyzer.polito.it/30alpha/docs/dissectors/PDMLSpec.htm
> >
> > I see that you're right, but if we're going to show bit values in hex
> > in the "value" attribute, then we need to also add the "unmaskedvalue"
> 
> > attribute for those fields. The "unmaskedvalue" attribute will show
> > the hex value of the entire byte or bytes.
> >
> > --gilbert
> >
> > On 5/24/05, vasanth.manickam@xxxxxx <vasanth.manickam@xxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > The export PDML features creates an xml file where the value of the
> > > subfields less than 1 byte have the wrong value. Instead of just the
> 
> > > bit or part of the byte the value field contains the entire byte.
> > >
> > > Example:-
> > >
> > > <field name="tcp.flags.cwr" showname="0... .... = Congestion Window
> > > Reduced
> > > (CWR): Not set" size="1" pos="47" show="0" value="18" />
> > >
> > >
> > > The value field is supposed to represent only the 1st bit but the
> > > entire byte is represented as value 18. This caused a lot of problem
> 
> > > in applications which process the xml file for further use.
> > >
> > > The below patch seems to solve this problem by modifying the value
> > > field that is written to the xml file
> > >
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > --- print.c 2005-05-24 12:52:55.000000000 +0100
> > > +++ print_new.c 2005-05-24 13:08:56.593591576 +0100
> > > @@ -346,6 +346,10 @@
> > > }
> > >     if (fi->length > 0) {
> > >     fputs("\" value=\"", pdata->fh);
> > > +     if (!fi->rep)
> > > +     print_escaped_xml(pdata->fh, &dfilter_string[chop_len]);
> > > +     else
> > >       write_pdml_field_hex_value(pdata, fi);
> > >     }
> > > }
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > 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
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> 
>