On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:24:02AM -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> Note that we have dissectors for all of those (and that the names aren't the protocol names, e.g. "domain" rather than "DNS", "microsoft-ds" rather than "SMB", "router" rather than "RIP").
> The issues are probably mostly with the protocols not used enough to have Wireshark dissectors.
>
> Perhaps we should, instead, have our own table of port numbers->protocol names.
A little off-topic:
We could implement it as value_string and finally fix bug #594 o/