[tcpdump-workers] New RFCs for 1) pcap file format and 2) rpcapd protocol?
--- Begin Message --- There should probably be RFC-style specifications for 1) the pcap file format and 2) the rpcapd protocol used for remote capturing. Currently, on GitHub, there's a "pcapng" team: https://github.com/pcapng with one repository containing the pcapng specification, and a "the-tcpdump-group" team: https://github.com/the-tcpdump-group with repositories for libpcap, tcpdump, and the tcpdump.org Web site. It makes sense to me to keep those specifications on a site such as GitHub; GitHub comes to mind first because that's where pcapng currently is. The options I see are: 1) add them as repositories to the pcapng team; 2) add them as repositories to the the-tcpdump-group team; 3) give them each their own teams. I see pcapng - and the pcap file format and rpcapd protocol - as not being directly tied to libpcap. *Historically*, pcap originated as the format that libpcap read and wrote, and rpcap was a protocol initially implemented in the WinPcap derivative of libpcap, but: 1) pcapng arose independently, and one of the earliest implementations was in Wireshark (where the internal APIs were easier to change; libpcap's support currently works through the existing API, but that hides a lot of the capabilities of pcapng); 2) code other than libpcap code reads and writes pcap files (including, but not limited to, Wireshark's code); 3) some devices either implement an rpcap server or could perhaps usefully do so, and they might have reasons to have independent implementations rather than basing their implementations on libpcap's rpcapd. So I'm not inclined to go with option 2) - and if we do go with option 2), whatever arguments are offered for that would probably apply to pcapng as well, so it would, in that case, make sense to move the pcapng repository to that team as well. 1) has the slight disadvantage that the name for the team suggests it's for pcapng only; it appears that teams can be renamed: https://help.github.com/en/github/setting-up-and-managing-organizations-and-teams/renaming-a-team Were we to rename it, I don't know what would be a good new name.--- End Message --- ___ tcpdump-workers mailing list tcpdump-workers@lists.tcpdump.org https://lists.sandelman.ca/mailman/listinfo/tcpdump-workers
Re: [tcpdump-workers] New RFCs for 1) pcap file format and 2) rpcapd protocol?
--- Begin Message --- On 21/03/2020 22:14, Guy Harris via tcpdump-workers wrote: > 1) has the slight disadvantage that the name for the team suggests it's for > pcapng only; it appears that teams can be renamed: > > > https://help.github.com/en/github/setting-up-and-managing-organizations-and-teams/renaming-a-team > > Were we to rename it, I don't know what would be a good new name. Option 1) with a rename to pcapteam or pcapXteam? --- End Message --- ___ tcpdump-workers mailing list tcpdump-workers@lists.tcpdump.org https://lists.sandelman.ca/mailman/listinfo/tcpdump-workers
Re: [tcpdump-workers] New RFCs for 1) pcap file format and 2) rpcapd protocol?
--- Begin Message --- El sáb., 21 mar. 2020 18:15, Guy Harris via tcpdump-workers < tcpdump-workers@lists.tcpdump.org> escribió: > 1) has the slight disadvantage that the name for the team suggests it's > for pcapng only; it appears that teams can be renamed: > > > https://help.github.com/en/github/setting-up-and-managing-organizations-and-teams/renaming-a-team > > Were we to rename it, I don't know what would be a good new name. > I'd be careful with this option, as it may affect downstream projects, as some download links that may be used for automated download (as part of a build process) could break. If there's anything downloadable I wouldn't change the team's name unless we make sure the old links remain accessible. --- End Message --- ___ tcpdump-workers mailing list tcpdump-workers@lists.tcpdump.org https://lists.sandelman.ca/mailman/listinfo/tcpdump-workers
Re: [tcpdump-workers] New RFCs for 1) pcap file format and 2) rpcapd protocol?
--- Begin Message --- On Mar 21, 2020, at 2:31 PM, Mario Rugiero via tcpdump-workers wrote: > El sáb., 21 mar. 2020 18:15, Guy Harris via tcpdump-workers > escribió: > >> 1) has the slight disadvantage that the name for the team suggests it's >> for pcapng only; it appears that teams can be renamed: >> >> >> https://help.github.com/en/github/setting-up-and-managing-organizations-and-teams/renaming-a-team >> >> Were we to rename it, I don't know what would be a good new name. >> > I'd be careful with this option, as it may affect downstream projects, as > some download links that may be used for automated download (as part of a > build process) could break. If there's anything downloadable I wouldn't > change the team's name unless we make sure the old links remain accessible. Its one repository contains the pcapng spec, no source code, so that particular example probably less likely to happen than would be the case for other teams. But what it would break are links to the pcapng spec on other pages. Perhaps changing the *description* of the team would suffice.--- End Message --- ___ tcpdump-workers mailing list tcpdump-workers@lists.tcpdump.org https://lists.sandelman.ca/mailman/listinfo/tcpdump-workers
Re: [tcpdump-workers] New RFCs for 1) pcap file format and 2) rpcapd protocol?
--- Begin Message --- On Mar 21, 2020, at 2:14 PM, Guy Harris via tcpdump-workers wrote: > The options I see are: 4) add a new team for rpcap, as it's a protocol rather than a file format, and thus only indirectly tied to pcap/pcapng, and putting the pcap format in the pcapng team because you can't have a pcap*ng* without having had a pcap in the first place.--- End Message --- ___ tcpdump-workers mailing list tcpdump-workers@lists.tcpdump.org https://lists.sandelman.ca/mailman/listinfo/tcpdump-workers
