On 08/22/2015 09:29 AM, Alexis La Goutte wrote:
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 8:10 AM, Jo�o Valverde
<joao.valverde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:joao.valverde@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
I'm not so sure now that I've done some tests with short and long
header chains, I think I'll drop it.
Can you push your proto ? or add some screenshot to see the different ?
For now all I did was:
diff --git a/epan/dissectors/packet-ipv6.c b/epan/dissectors/packet-ipv6.c
index 1c07776..76e5285 100644
--- a/epan/dissectors/packet-ipv6.c
+++ b/epan/dissectors/packet-ipv6.c
@@ -2225,7 +2225,7 @@ dissect_ipv6(tvbuff_t *tvb, packet_info *pinfo,
proto_tree *tree)
if (nxt == IP_PROTO_HOPOPTS) {
options_tvb = tvb_new_subset_remaining(tvb, offset);
- advance = dissect_hopopts(options_tvb, pinfo, ipv6_tree, &iph);
+ advance = dissect_hopopts(options_tvb, pinfo, tree, &iph);
if (advance > 0) {
nxt = tvb_get_guint8(tvb, offset);
offset += advance;
@@ -2274,7 +2274,7 @@ again:
nxt_handle =
dissector_get_uint_handle(ipv6_next_header_dissector_table, nxt);
if ((nxt_handle) &&
- ((advance = call_dissector_with_data(nxt_handle, options_tvb,
pinfo, ipv6_tree, &iph)) > 0)) {
+ ((advance = call_dissector_with_data(nxt_handle, options_tvb,
pinfo, tree, &iph)) > 0)) {
nxt = tvb_get_guint8(tvb, offset);
offset += advance;
plen -= advance;
I had meant to change the ipv6.nxt dissectors to ip.proto but didn't get
that far.
Regards,
Jo�o V.
On 08/21/2015 06:04 PM, Jo�o Valverde wrote:
I forgot to include:
f) it would fix this[1] bug too.
[1]https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=9996
On 08/21/2015 05:45 PM, Jo�o Valverde wrote:
Hi,
I would like to propose a patch to remove IPv6 extension
headers from
the IPv6 subtree and display them as normal IP protocols in
the UI.
Arguments for:
a) The current behaviour really, really, (really) hurts
legibility
b) It would be consistent among all extension headers (see
for example
MobileIPv6 vs AH - why the difference?)[1]
c) Extension headers aren't special in this regard, the IP
protocol
space is shared
d) IPv6 extension headers over IPv4 would be dissected, as
they should.
An expert info error can then be displayed where appropriate.
e) It would do away with the hack (?) used for the AH
dissector (I
think, I haven't looked very closely yet here).
Arguments against:
?)
Would anyone object to this proposal?
Thanks!
Jo�o V.
[1]https://bugs.wireshark.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=10705
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>>
Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=unsubscribe