[Richard Sharpe <rsharpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005, Ulf Lamping wrote:

> Joerg Mayer wrote:
>
> > Actually, I don't see a need for that. Ethertypes should probably be
> > added to the main Ethereal tree. There's only so much stuff I'm willing
> > to see for proprietary plugins and I don't think keeping an ethertype
> > secrect justifies the additional work.
> I agree.
>
> Making the ethertype public shouldn't be a real problem.
>
> Hmmm, a secret ethertype doesn't make a lot of sense unless you're providing 
> a secret service ;-)))

Be careful. You might be on No Such Agency's shit list now ... :-)

Regards
-------
Richard Sharpe, rsharpe[at]richardsharpe.com, rsharpe[at]samba.org,
sharpe[at]ethereal.com, http://www.richardsharpe.com