On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Jeff Morriss <jeff.morriss.ws@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10/10/13 18:22, Evan Huus wrote:
>>
>> It might be simpler and almost as efficient to have
>> recently-successful heuristic dissectors bubble nearer to the top of
>> the list so they are tried sooner. Port/conversation lookups are
>> hash-tables for the most part and likely won't be made noticeably
>> faster by caching.
>
>
> Wouldn't that expose us to the risk that the dissection actually changes on
> the 2nd pass (because the call order of the heuristics changes)? That would
> look pretty weird...
Only if two heuristics match the same packet, which is, theoretically,
a bug since they can't both be right.