https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4720
--- Comment #8 from oli <oliver@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2010-05-03 03:42:43 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #7)
> Nope, this is not how you do that. ntohl is a macro converting network order to
> host order. Network order is big endian, host order is either little or big.
> During the build either an conversion or an emptry macro is provided, based on
> the host platform. So, using ntohl already covers your concern.
Well no it doesn't, if it's BE "on-the-wire" - ntohl won't do it right
regardless of what the host is; in fact it will do it wrong on both LE and BE
hosts.
> What *is* of concern is lack of transfer syntax 'on the wire' for this
> protocol. We could assume this being little endian, then the
> proto_tree_add_item() calls should have TRUE as final parameter.
> Do the other fields from the protocol also show a LE/BE problem?
Agree, you do it whatever way you like. To my knowledge GE Fanuc use
exclusively Intel processors, so it's no surprise that they haven't bothered
noting the byte order.
The only problem fields are the two time fields.
The others are all fine.
--
Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.