[mmann78@xxxxxxxxxxxx]

Just let me know if you want me to keep track of the changed "first field of a protocol filter" for release note purposes.  Per bug 2794, I planned on changing a bunch once I can come up with a consistent naming convention (and then change dissectors to follow that convention).  The two biggest areas are "multiple subdissectors of a particular protocol" (ie H.248) and "common collection of protocols" (ie zbee, scsi).  My current thought is to have "multiple subdissectors of a particular protocol" keep the dot notation, (ie h248.<subprotocol>.<subprotocol field>) and have the "common collection of protocols" have an underscore inbetween (ie zbee_<protocol>.<subprotocol field>).  Comments are welcome. 

 

Technically, I don't think ntppriv -> ntp.priv shouldn't need to be noted because "ntppriv" is not a dissector.  Those fields are part of a structure within "ntp".   To me this was one of the goals of bug 2794 - to ensure the first field always correponds to a dissector filter name.

-----Original Message-----
From: Joerg Mayer <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
To: wireshark-dev <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sun, Jul 22, 2012 7:55 am
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] [Wireshark-bugs] [Bug 2794] Questionable display filter fields

Should we update the release notes if the first field of a protocol filter 
changes?
In this particular example I've noticed two while looking at about 5 protocols
(pap -> prap, ntpptiv -> ntp.priv).

Ciao
     Jörg

On Sat, Jul 21, 2012 at 08:15:43PM -0700, bugzilla-daemon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=2794
> 
> Michael Mann <mmann78@xxxxxxxxxxxx> changed:
> 
>            What    |Removed                     |Added
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>    Attachment #6362|review_for_checkin?         |review_for_checkin-
>               Flags|                            |
> 
> --- Comment #32 from Michael Mann <mmann78@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 2012-07-21 20:15:42 
PDT ---
> Comment on attachment 6362
>   --> https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=6362
> Fixing some more of the simpler "questionable" display filters
> 
> checked in different version of a comparible path to revision 43907
> 
> -- 
> Configure bugmail: https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
> ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
> You are the assignee for the bug.
> You are watching all bug changes.
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-bugs mailing list <wireshark-bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Archives:    http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-bugs
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-bugs
>              mailto:wireshark-bugs-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe

-- 
Joerg Mayer                                           <jmayer@xxxxxxxxx>
We are stuck with technology when what we really want is just stuff that
works. Some say that should read Microsoft instead of technology.
___________________________________________________________________________
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