There should be a way to refactor such that the hf_ fields are
parameters, so that each user (ssl, dtls, etc) gets their own set of
filter names.
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 2:42 PM, Dirk Jagdmann <doj@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I am writing this to the mailing list to get some opinions if this is
>> the right approach for this problem or if it should stay like it is now.
>> If I get positive feedback I will try to make dtls use more code from
>> the ssl dissector.
>
> The DTLS code was created from a copy of the SSL code some day in the past. It's
> true that they share a lot of common code and often changes in one of the files
> should be made in the other as well. However the problem with using common
> function is, that now the filter names would not have a common prefix any more.
> Your code change is showing this, since now when analyzing a DTLS packet some of
> the filters would start with "ssl."
>
> While I like the idea of refactoring both SSL and DTLS we should first think
> about a common nameing scheme for the filters, so that people using filters will
> not be surprised that some packets may not be matched.
>
> --
> ---> Dirk Jagdmann
> ----> http://cubic.org/~doj
> -----> http://llg.cubic.org
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> 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