When enumerated is used it uses 4 bytes for the data...
From RFC 3588:
Enumerated
Enumerated is derived from the Integer32 AVP Base Format. The
definition contains a list of valid values and their
interpretation and is described in the Diameter application
introducing the AVP.
So even if the spec says its Integer32, if we know the valid values
ane their interpretations, I don't see any harm in doing it as
Enumerated...?
On 7/5/07, cco <cristian.constantin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2007 at 04:58:17PM +0100, Martin Mathieson wrote:
> Change the type-name attribute to "Time".
>
> Someone (maybe me, but not for a few days at best) needs to
> rationalise these duplicated AVPs (between dictionary.xml and
> chargecontrol.xml). Anders?
>
> If you get it dissecting nicely there, please do send patches to this
list!
>
> Martin
cristian: o.k. I can help here. but... it seems for some avps there is
a major inconsitency btw. current 3gpp rel. and the defs. in dict.:
7.2.20 Cause-Code AVP
The Cause-Code AVP (AVP code 861) is of type Integer32 and includes the
cause code value from IMS node. It is used in Accounting-request[stop]
and/or Accounting-request[event] messages. It is also used in the
Credit-Control-request [Terminate] and/or Credit-Control-request [Event]
messages.
so Integer32 in the actual rel. and Enumerated in the dictionary...
if I spec. in the dict Integer32 as type can I still enumerate some
possible values?
thanks!
bye now!
cristian
_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev