Hi Jaap,
Great, thanks very much then! If I can clean up the RPL decoders I might try
to submit a patch for that too.
Regards,
-Colin
-----Original Message-----
From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jaap Keuter
Sent: September 30, 2010 8:46 PM
To: Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] 6LoWPAN Updates & I-D Status
Hi Colin,
I've committed both patches. No worries about pending IANA assignment, that
will
be worked out before a new stable branch will be created.
Thanks,
Jaap
On 09/30/2010 02:50 PM, Colin O'Flynn wrote:
> Hello,
>
> #1)
>
> There was an update to the 6LoWPAN patch from a while back to add
> missing features, specifically "context-based" decompression.
>
> In addition I've updated that patch to support the latest version of the
> 6lowpan standard, hc-13. Note that hc-13 has gone to last call and is
> unlikely to change the protocol format.
>
> The patch is attached to
> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5085 . I've tested
> this patch, and am also aware of a number of other people testing the
> patch as well.
>
> Would it be possible to get this committed to SVN and thus closed?
>
> #2)
>
> There are several I-D's which define new protocols. Two important
> updates for 6lowpan people are 6lowpan-nd (neighbor discovery
> extensions) and RPL (routing protocols).
>
> 6lowpan-nd is in working-group last-call and seems unlikely to change,
> there is a patch to add support at
> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5086 .
>
> The I-D however requires the assignment of 3 ND option types by the
> IANA, and is temporarily using 31/32/33 as the types as defined in the
> I-D. Thus the patch has these hard-coded in just like the other ND
> options in packet-ipv6.h. But according to
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/icmpv6-parameters this already conflicts
> with another option.
>
> How is this normally handled? Is it possible to get the code committed
> despite not having official IANA assignments, and they are just updated
> when they become official? Even if they were defined to zero, which
> isn't used, it would help as at least the code is present, and thus the
> final "patch" is much smaller.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Colin
>
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe