Comment # 5
on bug 13221
from Alexis La Goutte
(In reply to Michael Mann from comment #4)
> Created attachment 15117 [details]
> Patch for ROLE_REQUEST
>
> Here's a quick patch for the capture provided. It fixes the issue for the
> ROLE_REQUEST packet provided, but seems to open a can or worms as to how far
> that can go.
> Since I don't know the protocol, others can comment on how far this patch
> has to be taken. Do the switch statement need to be broken up for each time
> with the request reparsed? (Should the complete reparse be a preference? - I
> would vote no, but I'm not sure of the popularity of including the complete
> request in the error response)
It is like ICMP where the payload is include (but size can be limited...) (may
be look how to it is dissect on ICMP)
The problem to call all function will be to get some malformed frame (because
limited frame size...)
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.